Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • Back in the 1980s, actually, I gave my first talk at TED,

    譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: 易帆 余

  • and I brought some of the very, very first public demonstrations

    我的第一場 TED 演講 是在 1980 年代,

  • of virtual reality ever to the TED stage.

    那時我把最早最早的一些

  • And at that time, we knew that we were facing a knife-edge future

    虛擬實境展示帶到 TED 舞台上。

  • where the technology we needed,

    當時,大家都知道我們 正在面對一個不確定的未來、

  • the technology we loved,

    在那個未來世界裡, 有我們需要的科技、

  • could also be our undoing.

    喜愛的科技,

  • We knew that if we thought of our technology

    但也有可能是毀滅我們的科技。

  • as a means to ever more power,

    我們知道,如果我們把科技視為

  • if it was just a power trip, we'd eventually destroy ourselves.

    通往更多權力的手段、

  • That's what happens

    玩權弄勢的工具,

  • when you're on a power trip and nothing else.

    我們最終就會摧毀我們自己。

  • So the idealism

    如果你只想利用科技 來玩權弄勢就會這樣。

  • of digital culture back then

    在那時候,

  • was all about starting with that recognition of the possible darkness

    數位文化的理想主義

  • and trying to imagine a way to transcend it

    談的都是,一開始就要我們認清 科技可能會帶來的黑暗面,

  • with beauty and creativity.

    並嘗試用美及創意的方式

  • I always used to end my early TED Talks with a rather horrifying line, which is,

    來突破這些黑暗面。

  • "We have a challenge.

    早期在 TED 演講時,我的結尾 總是一句蠻嚇人的台詞:

  • We have to create a culture around technology

    「我們有一個挑戰。

  • that is so beautiful, so meaningful,

    我們得為科技創造出一種文化,

  • so deep, so endlessly creative,

    一種相當美麗、有意義的文化、

  • so filled with infinite potential

    一種相當深刻、有無盡創意、

  • that it draws us away from committing mass suicide."

    充滿無限潛力的科技文化,

  • So we talked about extinction as being one and the same

    這樣的科技文化才能讓我們 避免掉集體自殺。」

  • as the need to create an alluring, infinitely creative future.

    我們把人類滅絕當作一回事, 就如同我們在談,

  • And I still believe that that alternative of creativity

    我們需要創造出一個誘人且 有著無限創意未來一樣的重要。

  • as an alternative to death

    我仍然相信,創新的另一面

  • is very real and true,

    有可能就是死亡,

  • maybe the most true thing there is.

    這個說法是非常真實的,

  • In the case of virtual reality --

    也許是世上最真實的。

  • well, the way I used to talk about it

    就虛擬實境來說,

  • is that it would be something like

    我以前談論它的方式,

  • what happened when people discovered language.

    會把它說成像是

  • With language came new adventures, new depth, new meaning,

    人類剛發明語言時一樣。

  • new ways to connect, new ways to coordinate,

    隨著語言,出現了新的冒險、 新的深度、新的意義、

  • new ways to imagine, new ways to raise children,

    新的連結方式、新的協調方式、

  • and I imagined, with virtual reality, we'd have this new thing

    新的想像方式、 新的養育孩子方式;

  • that would be like a conversation

    我在想,有了虛擬實境, 我們就會創造出一種

  • but also like waking-state intentional dreaming.

    新的對話方式,

  • We called it post-symbolic communication,

    但又像是在清醒的狀態下, 刻意作夢一樣。

  • because it would be like just directly making the thing you experienced

    我們稱之為「後象徵性溝通」,

  • instead of indirectly making symbols to refer to things.

    因為那就像你直接的親身體驗,

  • It was a beautiful vision, and it's one I still believe in,

    而不只是間接地看到事物的表象。

  • and yet, haunting that beautiful vision

    那是個很美的遠景, 且是我現在仍然相信的遠景,

  • was the dark side of how it could also turn out.

    但,圍繞在這美好景像的黑暗面

  • And I suppose I could mention

    也有可能會發生。

  • from one of the very earliest computer scientists,

    我想,我可以談談,

  • whose name was Norbert Wiener,

    很早期的一位電腦科學家,

  • and he wrote a book back in the '50s, from before I was even born,

    他的名字叫諾伯特維納,

  • called "The Human Use of Human Beings."

    在五○年代我都還沒 出生時,他寫了一本書,

  • And in the book, he described the potential

    書名叫《人有人的用處》。

  • to create a computer system that would be gathering data from people

    在書中,他描述到我們是有可能

  • and providing feedback to those people in real time

    會創造出一個 收集人類資料的電腦,

  • in order to put them kind of partially, statistically, in a Skinner box,

    並提供即時回應給人類的電腦,

  • in a behaviorist system,

    為了統計這些行為, 這有點像是把人類放到施金納箱中

  • and he has this amazing line where he says,

    一種控制動物行為的實驗箱,

  • one could imagine, as a thought experiment --

    他說了一句很棒的話,

  • and I'm paraphrasing, this isn't a quote --

    大家可以想像有一種思想的實驗──

  • one could imagine a global computer system

    我現在要講的是改述過的釋義, 不是引述──

  • where everybody has devices on them all the time,

    大家可以想像, 有一個全球的電腦系統,

  • and the devices are giving them feedback based on what they did,

    在此系統中,每個人身上 時時刻刻都有一些裝置,

  • and the whole population

    這些裝置會根據 他們的行為給出回饋,

  • is subject to a degree of behavior modification.

    而在系統裡的全部人,

  • And such a society would be insane,

    都會受到某種程度的行為修正。

  • could not survive, could not face its problems.

    這樣子的社會簡直太瘋狂了,

  • And then he says, but this is only a thought experiment,

    這樣的社會無法生存, 無法面對它的問題。

  • and such a future is technologically infeasible.

    接著,他說,但這只是個思想實驗,

  • (Laughter)

    將來要把人類丟到實驗箱, 以科學的角度而言,我們也辦不到。

  • And yet, of course, it's what we have created,

    (笑聲)

  • and it's what we must undo if we are to survive.

    但,沒錯,我們人類現在 就已經陷入這樣的窘境,

  • So --

    而如果人類想要生存, 就要趕緊回頭。

  • (Applause)

    所以,

  • I believe that we made a very particular mistake,

    (掌聲)

  • and it happened early on,

    我認為,我們犯了一個 非常特殊的錯誤,

  • and by understanding the mistake we made,

    它在很早就發生了,

  • we can undo it.

    而透過了解我們所犯下的錯誤,

  • It happened in the '90s,

    我們就能將它還原。

  • and going into the turn of the century,

    事情發生在九○年代,

  • and here's what happened.

    正要進入世紀的轉折點,

  • Early digital culture,

    發生的經過如下。

  • and indeed, digital culture to this day,

    早期的數位文化,

  • had a sense of, I would say, lefty, socialist mission about it,

    當然,還有至今的數位文化,

  • that unlike other things that have been done,

    有一種……我會說是左翼、 社會主義使命的感覺,

  • like the invention of books,

    這不像其它已經有的東西,

  • everything on the internet must be purely public,

    比如書籍的發明,

  • must be available for free,

    在網路上的一切都 必須要是完全公開的,

  • because if even one person cannot afford it,

    必須要可以免費使用,

  • then that would create this terrible inequity.

    因為,如果有一個人負擔不起,

  • Now of course, there's other ways to deal with that.

    那就會造成很糟的不平等。

  • If books cost money, you can have public libraries.

    當然,有其它方法 可以處理這個問題。

  • And so forth.

    如果書籍要錢, 你可以用公共圖書館。

  • But we were thinking, no, no, no, this is an exception.

    諸如此類。

  • This must be pure public commons, that's what we want.

    但我們在想,不、不、不, 這是個例外。

  • And so that spirit lives on.

    它必須要是單純地能讓公眾 使用的,我們希望如此。

  • You can experience it in designs like the Wikipedia, for instance,

    如此,精神才能傳承下去。

  • many others.

    你可以體驗這些設計, 比如像維基百科

  • But at the same time,

    及其它許多這類的設計。

  • we also believed, with equal fervor,

    但同時,

  • in this other thing that was completely incompatible,

    我們也能帶著同等的熱情,

  • which is we loved our tech entrepreneurs.

    相信另外一種完全不一樣的事情,

  • We loved Steve Jobs; we loved this Nietzschean myth

    那就是,我們愛我們的科技企業家。

  • of the techie who could dent the universe.

    我們愛史帝夫賈伯斯, 我們愛這種尼采般的神話,

  • Right?

    這些能改變世界的科技天才。

  • And that mythical power still has a hold on us, as well.

    對嗎?

  • So you have these two different passions,

    而那神話般的力量 仍能持續地獲得我們的支持。

  • for making everything free

    所以,你會有這兩種不同的熱忱,

  • and for the almost supernatural power of the tech entrepreneur.

    一種是讓一切都免費,

  • How do you celebrate entrepreneurship when everything's free?

    另一種是科技企業家的力量, 近乎超自然的力量。

  • Well, there was only one solution back then,

    但當一切都是免費時, 你要如何讚頌企業家精神?

  • which was the advertising model.

    在當時,只有一個解決方案,

  • And so therefore, Google was born free, with ads,

    那就是廣告獲利模式。

  • Facebook was born free, with ads.

    因此,Google 剛開始 是免費的,但附帶廣告。

  • Now in the beginning, it was cute,

    臉書剛開始也是 免費的,但附帶廣告。

  • like with the very earliest Google.

    一開始,這還蠻討喜的,

  • (Laughter)

    就像最早期的 Google。

  • The ads really were kind of ads.

    (笑聲)

  • They would be, like, your local dentist or something.

    廣告真的就只是廣告。

  • But there's thing called Moore's law

    廣告可能就是你當地的牙醫之類的。

  • that makes the computers more and more efficient and cheaper.

    但有樣東西叫做摩爾定律,

  • Their algorithms get better.

    它讓電腦越來越高效 也越來越便宜。

  • We actually have universities where people study them,

    演算法也越來越強。

  • and they get better and better.

    在大學裡真的有人在研究它們,

  • And the customers and other entities who use these systems

    且它們越來越好。

  • just got more and more experienced and got cleverer and cleverer.

    客戶和使用這些系統的其它機構

  • And what started out as advertising

    變得越來越有經驗, 且越來越聰明。

  • really can't be called advertising anymore.

    一開始本來只是廣告,

  • It turned into behavior modification,

    現在真的不能再稱為廣告了。

  • just as Norbert Wiener had worried it might.

    它轉變成了「行為修改」。

  • And so I can't call these things social networks anymore.

    這就是諾伯特維納所擔心的。

  • I call them behavior modification empires.

    所以我已經無法再稱 這些東西為社交網路了。

  • (Applause)

    我稱它們為「行為修改帝國」。

  • And I refuse to vilify the individuals.

    (掌聲)

  • I have dear friends at these companies,

    我是反對誹謗個人的。

  • sold a company to Google, even though I think it's one of these empires.

    在這些公司中有我親愛的朋友,

  • I don't think this is a matter of bad people who've done a bad thing.

    我們也曾把一間公司賣給 Google, 即使我認為 Google 也是帝國之一。

  • I think this is a matter of a globally tragic,

    我不認為這是壞人做了壞事的問題。

  • astoundingly ridiculous mistake,

    我認為這一場全球性的悲劇,

  • rather than a wave of evil.

    非常荒謬的錯誤,

  • Let me give you just another layer of detail

    而不是邪惡的浪潮。

  • into how this particular mistake functions.

    讓我再做深一層的細節說明,

  • So with behaviorism,

    解釋這個錯誤是如何產生的。

  • you give the creature, whether it's a rat or a dog or a person,

    行為主義是這樣的,

  • little treats and sometimes little punishments

    不論是哪種生物, 比如老鼠、狗,或是人,

  • as feedback to what they do.

    它會根據生物的行為

  • So if you have an animal in a cage, it might be candy and electric shocks.

    回饋一點點甜頭或懲罰,

  • But if you have a smartphone,

    如果你把一隻動物放在籠子中, 你給牠的可能就是糖果和電擊。

  • it's not those things, it's symbolic punishment and reward.

    但如果你有一支智慧手機,

  • Pavlov, one of the early behaviorists,

    手機雖然不像那些實驗箱, 但也有象徵性的懲罰和獎賞。

  • demonstrated the famous principle.

    巴夫洛夫是最早的行為學家之一,

  • You could train a dog to salivate just with the bell, just with the symbol.

    他提出了著名的原則。

  • So on social networks,

    你只要用一個鈴噹或手勢, 就可以訓練一隻狗流口水。

  • social punishment and social reward function as the punishment and reward.

    在社交網路上,

  • And we all know the feeling of these things.

    有人會酸你或給你按讚 就像懲罰及獎賞一樣。

  • You get this little thrill --

    我們都知道懲罰和獎賞的感受如何。

  • "Somebody liked my stuff and it's being repeated."

    你會有點興奮,

  • Or the punishment: "Oh my God, they don't like me,

    「有人喜歡我的東西, 且重複按讚。」

  • maybe somebody else is more popular, oh my God."

    或被懲罰,「喔,天啊,他們不喜歡我,

  • So you have those two very common feelings,

    也許別人比較受歡迎,喔,天啊。」

  • and they're doled out in such a way that you get caught in this loop.

    你會有這兩種很常見的感受,

  • As has been publicly acknowledged by many of the founders of the system,

    就這樣一點一點地 把你困在這迴圈中。

  • everybody knew this is what was going on.

    這個系統的許多創始者 都已經公開承認這個現象,

  • But here's the thing:

    人人都知道發生的狀況就是如此。

  • traditionally, in the academic study of the methods of behaviorism,

    但,重點是:

  • there have been comparisons of positive and negative stimuli.

    傳統行為主義方法的學術研究

  • In this setting, a commercial setting,

    比較正面和負面的刺激。

  • there's a new kind of difference

    在這樣的前提下, 有商業行為的前提下,

  • that has kind of evaded the academic world for a while,

    會產生一種新的差異,

  • and that difference is that whether positive stimuli

    有好一段時間它都沒被學術界發現,

  • are more effective than negative ones in different circumstances,

    那差異就是,在不同的情況下,

  • the negative ones are cheaper.

    正面刺激是否比 負面刺激更有效之類的....

  • They're the bargain stimuli.

    結果,負面刺激比較便宜,

  • So what I mean by that is it's much easier

    用負面刺激很划算。

  • to lose trust than to build trust.

    我這麼說的意思是

  • It takes a long time to build love.

    失去信任比建立信任容易。

  • It takes a short time to ruin love.

    我們要花很長的時間才能建立「愛」。

  • Now the customers of these behavior modification empires

    但只要很短暫的時間就能毀了「愛」。

  • are on a very fast loop.

    這些「行為修改帝國」的客戶

  • They're almost like high-frequency traders.

    深陷在非常快的迴圈中。

  • They're getting feedbacks from their spends

    他們幾乎就像是股票的高頻交易者。

  • or whatever their activities are if they're not spending,

    他們從客戶的消費和動作獲得回饋,

  • and they see what's working, and then they do more of that.

    從而知道哪些效果好,

  • And so they're getting the quick feedback,

    就會更那樣做。

  • which means they're responding more to the negative emotions,

    因為那樣,他們會快速得到回饋,

  • because those are the ones that rise faster, right?

    也就是說他們對 負面情緒比較有反應,

  • And so therefore, even well-intentioned players

    因為這些負面刺激的回饋, 比正向刺激來得快,對吧?

  • who think all they're doing is advertising toothpaste

    因此,即使是出發點很好的業者,

  • end up advancing the cause of the negative people,

    他們認為他們所做的 不過就是為牙膏打廣告,

  • the negative emotions, the cranks,

    結果卻是協助造成了這社會上

  • the paranoids,

    充滿了負面情緒的人、怪胎、

  • the cynics, the nihilists.

    偏執狂、

  • Those are the ones who get amplified by the system.

    憤世嫉俗、對人生無望的人。

  • And you can't pay one of these companies to make the world suddenly nice

    系統會放大的就是這些人。

  • and improve democracy

    你無法支付其中任何一家公司

  • nearly as easily as you can pay to ruin those things.

    讓世界突然變好或民主進步,

  • And so this is the dilemma we've gotten ourselves into.

    無法像破壞這些東西那樣容易。

  • The alternative is to turn back the clock, with great difficulty,

    所以,是我們自己 造成了這樣的困境。

  • and remake that decision.

    替代方案就是 盡全力地讓時光倒流,

  • Remaking it would mean two things.

    然後重新做決定。

  • It would mean first that many people, those who could afford to,

    重新做決定意味著兩件事。

  • would actually pay for these things.

    第一,許多負擔得起這些東西的人

  • You'd pay for search, you'd pay for social networking.

    就真的得要為這些東西付錢。

  • How would you pay? Maybe with a subscription fee,

    搜尋要錢、用社交網路要錢。

  • maybe with micro-payments as you use them.

    你要如何付錢?也許是付訂閱費,

  • There's a lot of options.

    也許是在使用時支付極低的費用。

  • If some of you are recoiling, and you're thinking,

    有許多選擇。

  • "Oh my God, I would never pay for these things.

    如果有些人打退堂鼓,在想:

  • How could you ever get anyone to pay?"

    「天啊,我絕不會為這些東西付錢。

  • I want to remind you of something that just happened.

    你怎麼能要任何人付錢?」

  • Around this same time

    那麼我要提醒你一件剛發生的事。

  • that companies like Google and Facebook were formulating their free idea,

    之前 Google、臉書這些公司

  • a lot of cyber culture also believed that in the future,

    在發想他們的免費想法時,

  • televisions and movies would be created in the same way,

    有許多網路文化也相信,在未來,

  • kind of like the Wikipedia.

    我們也會用同樣的方式 來製作電視和電影,

  • But then, companies like Netflix, Amazon, HBO,

    有點像維基百科。

  • said, "Actually, you know, subscribe. We'll give you give you great TV."

    但,接著,像網飛、 亞馬遜、HBO 這類公司

  • And it worked!

    比如:「你只要訂閱我們, 我們就給你很好的節目。」

  • We now are in this period called "peak TV," right?

    結果很有效!

  • So sometimes when you pay for stuff, things get better.

    我們現在處在所謂的 「電視節目選擇超多」的時期,對吧?

  • We can imagine a hypothetical --

    所以,有時為東西付錢反而是好事。

  • (Applause)

    我們可以想像一個假設性的──

  • We can imagine a hypothetical world of "peak social media."

    (掌聲)

  • What would that be like?

    我們可以想像一個 社交媒體超多的世界。

  • It would mean when you get on, you can get really useful,

    那會是什麼樣子?

  • authoritative medical advice instead of cranks.

    那意味著,當你上社交媒體, 你能得到非常有用、

  • It could mean when you want to get factual information,

    有權威性的醫療建議, 而不是亂七八糟的垃圾。

  • there's not a bunch of weird, paranoid conspiracy theories.

    也可能意味著, 當你想要取得真實資訊時,

  • We can imagine this wonderful other possibility.

    不會得到一堆怪異、 偏執的陰謀論。

  • Ah.

    我們可以想像這美好的 「另一種可能性」。

  • I dream of it. I believe it's possible.

    啊。

  • I'm certain it's possible.

    我夢想它能成真。 我相信它能成真。

  • And I'm certain that the companies, the Googles and the Facebooks,

    我很確定它能成真。

  • would actually do better in this world.

    我很確定像 Google 及臉書這些公司

  • I don't believe we need to punish Silicon Valley.

    他們會做得更好。

  • We just need to remake the decision.

    我不認為我們需要去懲罰矽谷。

  • Of the big tech companies,

    我們只需要重新決定。

  • it's really only two that depend on behavior modification and spying

    在大型科技公司中,

  • as their business plan.

    其實只有兩間 仰賴行為修改和暗中監視

  • It's Google and Facebook.

    做為它們的事業計畫。

  • (Laughter)

    就是 Google 和臉書。

  • And I love you guys.

    (笑聲)

  • Really, I do. Like, the people are fantastic.

    我愛你們。

  • I want to point out, if I may,

    真的,我愛你們。那些人都很棒。

  • if you look at Google,

    如果可以的話,我想聲明這點。

  • they can propagate cost centers endlessly with all of these companies,

    比如說 Google,

  • but they cannot propagate profit centers.

    他們可以和這些公司 無限地將成本中心分散出去,