Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

已審核 字幕已審核
  • So, we used to solve big problems.

    我們曾經解決過一些大問題

  • On July 21st, 1969,

    1969年7月21號

  • Buzz Aldrin climbed out of Apollo 11's lunar module

    巴茲‧奧爾德林從阿波羅11號的登月艙爬出

  • and descended onto the Sea of Tranquility.

    降落到月球的寧靜海區域(阿波羅11號登陸的著陸區)

  • Armstrong and Aldrin were alone,

    阿姆斯壯和奧爾德林隻身來到月球,

  • but their presence on the moon's gray surface

    但是他們在月球的灰色表面上現身

  • was the culmination of a convulsive, collective effort.

    是出於眾多嘔心瀝血努力得來的顛峰之作

  • The Apollo program was the greatest

    整個阿波羅計劃是

  • peacetime mobilization

    非戰爭時期最偉大的動員

  • in the history of the United States.

    在美國歷史裡

  • To get to the moon, NASA spent

    為了登陸月球,NASA 花了

  • around 180 billion dollars in today's money,

    以現今的貨幣來計算大約是一億八千萬美金

  • or four percent of the federal budget.

    或是4%的聯邦總預算

  • Apollo employed around 400,000 people

    阿波羅計畫大約雇用了40萬人

  • and demanded the collaboration of 20,000

    並且要總數兩萬個公司,

  • companies, universities and government agencies.

    大學以及政府單位相互合作

  • People died, including the crew of Apollo 1.

    許多人因此送命,包含在阿波羅一號所罹難的工作人員

  • But before the Apollo program ended,

    但是在整個阿波羅計畫終止以前

  • 24 men flew to the moon.

    有24位人員被送上了月球

  • Twelve walked on its surface, of whom Aldrin,

    當中12位在月球表面漫步,其中的奧爾德林

  • following the death of Armstrong last year,

    從去年阿姆斯壯逝世之後

  • is now the most senior.

    是現今最老的一位。

  • So why did they go?

    回過頭來,他們為什麼要登陸月球?

  • They didn't bring much back:

    他們沒帶多少東西回來

  • 841 pounds of old rocks,

    841磅的舊石頭

  • and something all 24 later emphasized --

    以及24位太空人在之後強調的

  • a new sense of the smallness

    一種新的自我渺小認知

  • and the fragility of our common home.

    和我們共同的家園-地球,是多麼脆弱

  • Why did they go? The cynical answer is they went

    那為什麼要送他們上月球? 一種憤世嫉俗的回答是

  • because President Kennedy wanted to show

    這是因為甘乃迪總統要展現

  • the Soviets that his nation had the better rockets.

    他的國家擁有比蘇聯更好的火箭

  • But Kennedy's own words at Rice University in 1962

    但甘乃迪在1962年於萊斯大學所做的演講

  • provide a better clue.

    提供了更好的線索。

  • (Video) John F. Kennedy: But why, some say, the moon?

    甘乃迪:有人問,為什麼是月球?

  • Why choose this as our goal?

    為什麼要選這個當作我們的目標?

  • And they may well ask,

    這個問題問得好

  • why climb the highest mountain?

    為什麼要攀登最高的山峰?

  • Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic?

    為什麼35年前要飛越大西洋?

  • Why does Rice play Texas?

    為什麼萊斯大學在德州?

  • We choose to go to the moon.

    我們選擇要登陸月球

  • We choose to go to the moon.

    是我們選擇要登陸月球

  • (Applause)

    (掌聲)

  • We choose to go to the moon in this decade,

    我們選擇在十年內登陸月球

  • and do the other things,

    並且做其他的事情

  • not because they are easy, but because they are hard.

    不是因為它們容易,而是因為它們困難。

  • Jason Pontin: To contemporaries,

    演講者:在當時

  • Apollo wasn't only a victory of West over East

    阿波羅計畫不只是西方戰勝東方

  • in the Cold War.

    在冷戰時期的勝利。

  • At the time, the strongest emotion

    在當下,最強烈的情感是

  • was of wonder

    驚訝於

  • at the transcendent powers of technology.

    科技的卓越力量

  • They went because it was a big thing to do.

    他們去是因為要完成這件大事

  • Landing on the moon occurred in the context

    登陸月球引發了

  • of a long series of technological triumphs.

    一連串在科技上的大勝利

  • The first half of the 20th century produced

    在20世紀的前半製造出了

  • the assembly line and the airplane,

    組裝線以及飛機

  • penicillin and a vaccine for tuberculosis.

    盤尼西林以及結核病疫苗

  • In the middle years of the century,

    在20世紀的中期

  • polio was eradicated and smallpox eliminated.

    小兒麻痺徹底根絕、天花絕跡

  • Technology itself seemed to possess

    科技本身似乎擁有

  • what Alvin Toffler in 1970

    Alvin Toffler在1970說的

  • called "accelerative thrust."

    "加速度推力"

  • For most of human history,

    實現在整個人類歷史上

  • we could go no faster than a horse

    我們不能移動的比馬快

  • or a boat with a sail,

    或者是比帆船快

  • but in 1969, the crew of Apollo 10

    但是1969年,阿波羅10號的機員

  • flew at 25,000 miles an hour.

    飛行速度是每小時25000英里

  • Since 1970, no human beings

    自從1970年開始,就沒有人類

  • have been back to the moon.

    再回到月球

  • No one has traveled faster than the crew

    沒有人可以移動的快過於

  • of Apollo 10,

    阿波羅10當中的機組人員

  • and blithe optimism about technology's powers

    此時,對科技力量的樂觀無憂

  • has evaporated

    已經消失殆盡

  • as big problems we had imagined technology would solve,

    那些我們期待科技力量可以解決的大問題

  • such as going to Mars,

    例如登陸火星

  • creating clean energy, curing cancer,

    創造乾淨能源,治癒癌症

  • or feeding the world have come to seem

    或是解決糧食問題都變成了

  • intractably hard.

    棘手的困難

  • I remember watching the liftoff of Apollo 17.

    我記得當時看到阿波羅17號升空

  • I was five years old,

    我當時五歲,

  • and my mother told me not to stare

    我母親告訴我,不要直視

  • at the fiery exhaust of a Saturn V rocket.

    土星五號火箭的燃燒推進器

  • I vaguely knew this was to be the last

    我隱約地知道這將是最後一次

  • of the moon missions,

    月球計劃

  • but I was absolutely certain there would be

    但我相信將來絕對會有

  • Mars colonies in my lifetime.

    火星殖民計劃出現在我的有生之年。

  • So "Something happened

    所以,

  • to our capacity to solve big problems with technology"

    "我們對使用科技來解決大問題無能為力"

  • has become a commonplace.

    這一論點變得稀鬆平常。

  • You hear it all the time.

    你常常聽到這些

  • We've heard it over the last two days here at TED.

    我們已經在過去兩天內從 TED 大會中聽到這些

  • It feels as if technologists have diverted us

    那感覺像是科學家使我們歡愉

  • and enriched themselves with trivial toys,

    並且將一些無足輕重的玩具來豐富他們自己,

  • with things like iPhones and apps and social media,

    就像是智慧型手機、應用程式以及社交媒體

  • or algorithms that speed automated trading.

    或是加速自動化交易的演算法

  • There's nothing wrong with most of these things.

    大多數這些事情並沒有什麼錯

  • They've expanded and enriched our lives.

    它們拓展並且豐富了我們的生活

  • But they don't solve humanity's big problems.

    但是它們並沒有解決人類的大問題。

  • What happened?

    發生了什麽事?

  • So there is a parochial explanation in Silicon Valley,

    在矽谷,有一個狹隘的解釋

  • which admits that it has been funding less ambitious companies

    他們承認,跟過去比起來,野心勃勃的公司較難募得基金

  • than it did in the years when it financed

    在他們準備上市的時候

  • Intel, Microsoft, Apple and Genentech.

    英特爾、微軟、蘋果以及基因泰克

  • Silicon Valley says the markets are to blame,

    矽谷的人說,市場是罪魁禍首

  • in particular the incentives that venture capitalists

    特別是鼓勵那些風險資本家提供資金給

  • offer to entrepreneurs.

    創業者

  • Silicon Valley says that venture investing

    矽谷的人說,那些風險資本家的投資

  • shifted away from funding transformational ideas

    從可以改變本質的想法移到了

  • and towards funding incremental problems

    可以增加附加價值的問題上

  • or even fake problems.

    或者是假的問題。

  • But I don't think that explanation is good enough.

    但我不覺得這解釋夠好。

  • It mostly explains what's wrong with Silicon Valley.

    這頂多解釋了矽谷出了什麼錯。

  • Even when venture capitalists were at their most

    即使當風險資本家面對他們最大

  • risk-happy, they preferred small investments,

    可容忍風險,他們也只願意提供很少的投資

  • tiny investments that offered an exit within 10 years.

    這十年內的微量投資讓人們不斷地退出

  • V.C.s have always struggled

    風險資本家老是很掙扎

  • to invest profitably in technologies such as energy

    對於投資在科技上的獲利像是能源

  • whose capital requirements are huge

    這種需要大量資本

  • and whose development is long and lengthy,

    長時間的開發週期

  • and V.C.s have never, never funded the development

    而風險投資家從來,從來不投資

  • of technologies meant to solve big problems

    可以解決大問題的科技研究

  • that possess no immediate commercial value.

    這些研究往往無法有短期的經濟效益。

  • No, the reasons we can't solve big problems

    不,我們無法解決大問題的原因

  • are more complicated and more profound.

    比這更複雜和深奧

  • Sometimes we choose not to solve big problems.

    有些時候我們選擇不去解決大問題

  • We could go to Mars if we want.

    我們可以去火星,只要我們想做到

  • NASA even has the outline of a plan.

    NASA對這計畫已經有了大綱

  • But going to Mars would follow a political decision

    但是去火星需要的是政治決定

  • with popular appeal, and that will never happen.

    由社會普遍呼籲,但這事情從沒發生過。

  • We won't go to Mars, because everyone thinks

    我們無法去火星是因為每個人都這樣想

  • there are more important things

    在地球上,有著更重要的事情

  • to do here on Earth.

    正等著我們去做。

  • Sometimes, we can't solve big problems

    有時候,我們無法解決大問題

  • because our political systems fail.

    是因為我們的政治制度失敗

  • Today, less than two percent

    現今,少於2%的

  • of the world's energy consumption

    全世界能源消耗

  • derives from advanced, renewable sources

    是取得於先進技術,可重複性使用資源

  • such as solar, wind and biofuels,

    像是太陽能,風力以及生化燃油

  • less than two percent,

    少於2%

  • and the reason is purely economic.

    而原因是純粹經濟上

  • Coal and natural gas are cheaper

    煤炭和天然氣是比

  • than solar and wind,

    太陽能及風力發電還來的便宜,

  • and petroleum is cheaper than biofuels.

    而石油又比生物燃料便宜。

  • We want alternative energy sources

    我們尋求替代能源可以

  • that can compete on price. None exist.

    在價格上有競爭力,但是找不到。

  • Now, technologists, business leaders

    現今,科技人員,企業領袖

  • and economists all basically agree

    和經濟學家都基本上同意

  • on what national policies and international treaties

    國家政策以及國際條約

  • would spur the development of alternative energy:

    將刺激這些替代能源的開發:

  • mostly, a significant increase in energy

    大多數是對於能源的研究與開發

  • research and development,

    將會顯著地增加,

  • and some kind of price on carbon.

    並且對碳排放開始定價。

  • But there's no hope in the present political climate

    但是對於現今的政治氛圍,這是沒有希望的

  • that we will see U.S. energy policy

    這是我們在美國能源政策

  • or international treaties that reflect that consensus.

    或是國際條約上看到的

  • Sometimes, big problems that had seemed technological

    有時候,大問題通常都是科技上的

  • turn out not to be so.

    但並非如此。

  • Famines were long understood to be caused

    飢荒已經長期被公認為

  • by failures in food supply.

    是食物供給出現問題。

  • But 30 years of research have taught us

    但是三十年來的研究告訴我們

  • that famines are political crisis

    飢荒是由於政治危機

  • that catastrophically affect food distribution.

    災難般地影響著食物配給

  • Technology can improve things like crop yields

    科技可以改善的事情像是作物產量

  • or systems for storing and transporting food,

    或是儲存以及運送食物的系統

  • but there will be famines so long as there are bad governments.

    但是如今還有飢荒是因為有糟糕的政府

  • Finally, big problems sometimes elude solution

    最後,有時逃避解決大問題

  • because we don't really understand the problem.

    是因為我們不瞭解問題。

  • President Nixon declared war on cancer in 1971,

    尼克森總統在1971年向癌症宣戰

  • but we soon discovered

    但不久我們發現

  • there are many kinds of cancer,

    有太多種類的癌症,

  • most of them fiendishly resistant to therapy,

    大多數是如惡魔似地難以治療,

  • and it is only in the last 10 years

    而僅僅在過去的十年

  • that effective, viable therapies

    有效且可實行的治療方法

  • have come to seem real.

    才真正的出現。

  • Hard problems are hard.

    困難問題就是難以解決

  • It's not true that we can't solve big problems through technology.

    但這不代表我們無法透過科技來解決大問題

  • We can, we must, but these four elements

    我們可以,我們必須,但需要有四個要素

  • must all be present:

    都必須符合:

  • Political leaders and the public

    政治領袖和群眾

  • must care to solve a problem;

    必須關心來解決問題;

  • institutions must support its solution;

    機構必須支持其解決方案;

  • It must really be a technological problem;

    它必須真的是個科技問題;

  • and we must understand it.

    而我們必須要了解它。

  • The Apollo mission,

    阿波羅任務

  • which has become a kind of metaphor

    已經成為一種象徵

  • for technology's capacity to solve big problems,

    代表科技的能力足以解決大問題,

  • met these criteria.

    它也達到這些準則。

  • But it is an irreproducible model for the future.

    展望未來,這是一個不可複製的典範。

  • It is not 1961.

    現在不是1961。

  • There is no galvanizing contest like the Cold War,

    已經沒有像冷戰時代的軍備競賽,

  • no politician like John Kennedy

    沒有像甘乃迪的政治家

  • who can heroize the difficult and the dangerous,

    可以英雄式的挑戰困難與危險,

  • and no popular science fictional mythology

    並且沒有普遍的科幻小說

  • such as exploring the solar system.

    像是探索太陽系。

  • Most of all, going to the moon

    絕大多數,登陸月球

  • turned out to be easy.

    已經變得平凡無奇

  • It was just three days away.

    僅僅只是三天光景。

  • And arguably it wasn't even solving

    雄辯地說詞對解決問題

  • much of a problem.

    無法帶來多大的幫助。

  • We are left alone with our day,

    我們繼續過我們的日子,

  • and the solutions of the future will be harder won.

    而在未來是更難以獲得解決方案。

  • God knows, we don't lack for the challenges.

    上帝知道,我們不乏挑戰。

  • Thank you very much.

    謝謝

  • (Applause)

    (掌聲)

So, we used to solve big problems.

我們曾經解決過一些大問題

字幕與單字
已審核 字幕已審核

影片操作 你可以在這邊進行「影片」的調整,以及「字幕」的顯示

B1 中級 中文 TED 月球 阿波羅 科技 解決 登陸

【TED】傑森.波廷: 科技真能解決大問題? (Jason Pontin: Can technology solve our big problems?)

  • 3565 287
    VoiceTube 發佈於 2013 年 10 月 21 日
影片單字