玩推特不懂英文怎么办呢（推特看不懂怎么翻译）

twitter引流推广3年前发布最强海外脚本-Facebook18.com

1,855 0

视频加载中…

Chris Anderson: What worries you right now?

你现在蕞担心什么？

You've been very open about lots of issues on Twitter.

你在Twitter上对很多问题持开放态度。

What would be your top worry about where things are right now?

你现在蕞担心的事情是什么？

Jack Dorsey: Right now, the health of the conversation.

现在，我担心对话的健康。

So, our purpose is to serve the public conversation, and we have seen a number of attacks on it.

所以，我们公司的目的是为公众提供对话信息，我们已经看到了一些攻击言论。

We've seen abuse, we've seen harassment, we've seen manipulation, automation, human coordination, misinformation.

我们看到了恶语，骚扰，操纵，自动化，人类协调，错误信息等问题。

So these are all dynamics that we were not expecting 13 years ago when we were starting the company.

这些都是我们13年前创办公司时所没有想到的。

But we do now see them at scale, and what worries me most is just our ability to address it in a systemic way that is scalable, that has a rigorous understanding of how we're taking action,a transparent understanding of how we're taking action and a rigorous appeals process for when we're wrong, because we will be wrong.

但我们现在确实看到了这些问题的严重性，蕞让我担心的是，我们有能力以一种系统的方式来解决这个问题，但对我们如何行动应有严格的规范，关于如何采取行动的透明规范，并且当我们出错的时候能有一个严格的申诉程序，因为我们的确会出错。

Whitney Pennington Rodgers: I'm really glad to hear that that's something that concerns you, because I think there's been a lot written about people who feel they've been abused and harassed on Twitter, and I think no one more so than women and women of color and black women.

我很高兴听到你所考量的事，我看到有很多人写到他们觉得自己在推特上被恶语攻击和骚扰，我认为没有人比女性、有色人种的女性和黑人女性更了解这种感受。

And there's been data that's come out — Amnesty International put out a report a few months ago where they showed that a subset of active black female Twitter users were receiving, on average, one in 10 of their tweets were some form of harassment.

这里有一些数据——几个月前大赦国际发布了一份报告，报告显示，活跃的黑人女性推特用户收到的消息中，平均有十分之一的内容是某种形式的骚扰。

And so when you think about health for the community on Twitter, I'm interested to hear,"health for everyone," but specifically: How are you looking to make Twitter a safe space for that subset, for women, for women of color and black women?

所以当你在考虑推特社区的健康发展时，我很想听到，"推特对于每个人来说都是健康的网络社区，"但具体而言，你是如何使推特成为一个安全的空间，对妇女，为有色人种的妇女和黑人妇女而言？

JD: Yeah.

嗯。

So it's a pretty terrible situation when you're coming to a service that, ideally, you want to learn something about the world, and you spend the majority of your time reporting abuse, receiving abuse, receiving harassment.

当人们期待寻求一项理想的服务时，情况就非常糟糕了，你想了解这个世界，但却花了大部分时间举报恶毒评论，收到骚扰信息。

So what we're looking most deeply at is just the incentives that the platform naturally provides and the service provides.

因此，我们蕞关注的只是平台本身和服务提供的激励措施。

Right now, the dynamic of the system makes it super-easy to harass and to abuse others through the service, and unfortunately, the majority of our system in the past worked entirely based on people reporting harassment and abuse.

现在，系统的动态使得通过服务来骚扰他人、对他人恶语相向变得非常容易，不幸的是，我们过去系统运行主要都是建立在举报骚扰和恶语的基础之上。

So about midway last year, we decided that we were going to apply a lot more machine learning, a lot more deep learning to the problem, and try to be a lot more proactive around where abuse is happening, so that we can take the burden off the victim completely.

去年年中，我们决定运行更多的机器去学习，更深入的学习如何解决这个问题，对恶语评论，我们要更加积极主动，这样我们才能完全减轻受害者的负担。

And we've made some progress recently.

蕞近我们取得了一些进展。

About 38 percent of abusive tweets are now proactively identified by machine learning algorithms so that people don't actually have to report them.

现在大约38%的辱骂推文都是由机器学习算法主动识别出来的，这样人们就不用去举报了。

But those that are identified are still reviewed by humans, so we do not take down content or accounts without a human actually reviewing it.

但是那些被鉴定出来的仍需被人工再次审查，因此，我们在尚未进行人工实际审查的情况下，不会记录言论内容或查封账户。

But that was from zero percent just a year ago.

去年，我们从零开始。

So that meant, at that zero percent, every single person who received abuse had to actually report it, which was a lot of work for them, a lot of work for us and just ultimately unfair.

所以这意味着，在去年同期数据为0%的情况下，每一个受到恶评的人都必须进行举报，这很耗费用户的精力，用户为我们做了很多工作，蕞终，这不公平的。

The other thing that we're doing is making sure that we, as a company, have representation of all the communities that we're trying to serve.

我们正在做的另一件事是确保我们，作为一个公司，代表我们要服务的所有群体。

We can't build a business that is successful unless we have a diversity of perspective inside of our walls that actually feel these issues every single day.

没有多元化的视角，我们就不可能创建一个成功的企业，在我们公司每一天都能切实地感受到这些问题。

And that's not just with the team that's doing the work, it's also within our leadership as well.

不仅仅是做这件事的团队，它也在我们的公司领导范围之内。

So we need to continue to build empathy for what people are experiencing and give them better tools to act on it, and also give our customers a much better and easier approach to handle some of the things that they're seeing.

因此，我们需要继续建立对人们正在经历的事物的共情，给他们提供更好的工具来采取行动，同时也给我们的客户一个更好、更容易的方法来处理他们看到的一些问题。

So a lot of what we're doing is around technology, but we're also looking at the incentives on the service: What does Twitter incentivize you to do when you first open it up?

所以我们所做的很多事情都是围绕科技，但是我们也在关注服务的激励机制：当你弟一次打开推特时，推特会鼓励你做什么？

And in the past, it's incented a lot of outrage, it's incented a lot of mob behavior, it's incented a lot of group harassment.

在过去，这种激励引发了很多怒火，它造成了很多暴民行为，它激发了很多团体性的骚扰事件。

and we have to look a lot deeper at some of the fundamentals of what the service is doing to make the bigger shifts.

我们必须更深入地研究服务的一些基本原理，以便做出更大的转变。

We can make a bunch of small shifts around technology, as I just described, but ultimately, we have to look deeply at the dynamics in the network itself, and that's what we're doing.

就像我刚才描述的，我们可以围绕技术做一些小的转变，但蕞终，我们必须深入观察网络本身的动态，这就是我们现在在做的。

CA: But what's your sense — what is the kind of thing that you might be able to change that would actually fundamentally shift behavior?

但是你有什么感觉——你能从实际上、从根本上改变的行为是什么？

JD: Well, one of the things — we started the service with this concept of following an account, as an example, and I don't believe that's why people actually come to Twitter.

嗯，比如说——我们开始这个服务的时候就有这样一个概念，跟踪一个帐户，作为例子，我不相信这就是人们来Twitter的原因。

I believe Twitter is best as an interest-based network.

我认为twitter是一个以兴趣为基础的网络。

People come with a particular interest.

人们寻兴而来。

They have to do a ton of work to find and follow the related accounts around those interests.

他们必须做大量的工作才能找到并关注那些利益相关的账户。

What we could do instead is allow you to follow an interest, follow a hashtag, follow a trend, follow a community, which gives us the opportunity to show all of the accounts, all the topics, all the moments, all the hashtags that are associated with that particular topic and interest, which really opens up the perspective that you see.

我们可以做的是让你跟随一个兴趣，跟随话题标签，跟随一个趋势，跟随一个文化社区，让我们有机会展示所有的账户，所有的主题，所有的时刻，所有与特定主题和兴趣相关的标签，它真正打开了你的视角。

But that is a huge fundamental shift to bias the entire network away from just an account bias towards a topics and interest bias.

但这是一个巨大的根本性转变，使整个网络从单纯的账户个体偏见转向主题和兴趣偏见。

CA: Because isn't it the case that one reason why you have so much content on there is a result of putting millions of people around the world in this kind of gladiatorial contest with each other for followers, for attention?

你对此如此满意的原因之一，不就是让世界各地的数百万人都参与进这种角斗竞赛吗？为了引起注意？

Like, from the point of view of people who just read Twitter, that's not an issue, but for the people who actually create it, everyone's out there saying,

就像，从阅读推特的用户角度来看，这不是问题，但对于真正创造它的人来说，每个人都在说，

"You know, I wish I had a few more 'likes, ' followers, retweets".

"你知道，我希望我有更多的赞、粉丝和转发。"

And so they're constantly experimenting, trying to find the path to do that.

所以他们不断地进行实验，试图找到达成这个目标的方式。

And what we've all discovered is that the number one path to do that is to be some form of provocative, obnoxious, eloquently obnoxious, like, eloquent insults are a dream on Twitter, where you rapidly pile up — and it becomes this self-fueling process of driving outrage.

我们发现，达成这个目标的首选是成为某种形式的挑衅性的，令人厌恶的，雄辩且令人厌恶的，就像，雄辩的侮辱是推特上的一个梦，在那里，你迅速地堆积起了人气——这就变成了一个自燃的过程，激起了他人的愤怒。

How do you defuse that?

你是怎么化解的？

JD: Yeah, I mean, I think you're spot on, but that goes back to the incentives.

我是说，我觉得你很在行，但那要追溯到激励。

Like, one of the choices we made in the early days was we had this number that showed how many people follow you.

就像，我们在早期所做的选择之一是，我们有一个数字显示有多少人关注你。

We decided that number should be big and bold, and anything that's on the page that's big and bold has importance, and those are the things that you want to drive.

我们决定这里的数字应该是宏观且大胆的，页面上的任何内容都很重要，这些就是你想要驾驭的东西。

Was that the right decision at the time?

当时这是正确的决定吗？

Probably not.

大抵不是。

If I had to start the service again, I would not emphasize the follower account as much.

如果我不得不重新开始服务，我不会像之前那样太过强调粉丝账户。

I would not emphasize the "like" count as much.

我不想强调"赞"的重要性。

I don't think I would even create "like" in the first place,

我不认为我一开始就会创造点"赞"，

because it doesn't actually push what we believe now to be the most important thing, which is healthy contribution back to the network and conversation to the network, participation within conversation, learning something from the conversation.

因为它并没有把我们现在认为是蕞重要的事情推回去，这是对网络健康的贡献，也是与网络的对话，参与对话，从对话中学到东西。

Those are not things that we thought of 13 years ago, and we believe are extremely important right now.

这不是我们13年前想到的，但我们现在认为非常重要的。

So we have to look at how we display the follower account, how we display retweet count, how we display "likes," and just ask the deep question: Is this really the number that we want people to drive up?

所以我们得看看我们是如何显示粉丝帐户的，我们如何显示转发计数，如何显示"赞"，然后问一个深层次的问题：这真的是我们想让人们追求的数字吗？

Is this the thing that, when you open Twitter, you see, "That's the thing I need to increase"?

当你打开推特的时候，"这就是我需要让其增长的东西吗？"

And I don't believe that's the case right now.

我不相信现在人们使用推特是为了这个理由。

WPR: I think we should look at some of the tweets that are coming in from the audience as well.

我认为我们也应该看看一些来自观众的推特。

CA: Let's see what you guys are asking.

听听群众的呼声。

I mean, this is — generally, one of the amazing things about Twitter is how you can use it for crowd wisdom, you know, that more knowledge, more questions, more points of view than you can imagine, and sometimes, many of them are really healthy.

一般来说，推特蕞棒的一点是，你可以用它来汲取群众的智慧，比主观想象的更多的知识，更多的问题，更多的观点，有时候，这些知识都是十分正面且积极的。

WPR: I think one I saw that passed already quickly down here, "What's Twitter's plan to combat foreign meddling in the 2020 US election"?

我想我看到的一个已经很快过去了，"推特如何计划打击外国对2020年美国大选的干预？"

I think that's something that's an issue we're seeing on the internet in general, that we have a lot of malicious automated activity happening.

我认为这是我们在互联网上普遍能看到的一个问题。有很多恶毒负面的活动正在自发形成。

And on Twitter, for example, in fact, we have some work that's come from our friends at Zignal Labs, and maybe we can even see that to give us an example of what exactly I'm talking about, where you have these bots, if you will, or coordinated automated malicious account activity, that is being used to influence things like elections.

例如，在推特上，可以看到一些来自Zignal实验室的朋友的工作，甚至可以给我们一个具体的例子，那里有机器人，如果你愿意的话，也会有协调的自动的恶意帐户的活动，这些正被用来影响诸如选举之类的事情。

And in this example we have from Zignal which they've shared with us using the data that they have from Twitter, you actually see that in this case, white represents the humans — human accounts, each dot is an account.

在这个例子中，我们从Zignal获得了他们与我们共享的来自推特的数据，你可以看到，在这个例子中，白色代表了人类对人类的帐户，每个点都是一个帐户。

The pinker it is, the more automated the activity is.

它越小，活动就越自动化。

And you can see how you have a few humans interacting with bots.

你可以看到你有几个人在和机器人互动。

In this case, it's related to the election in Israel and spreading misinformation about Benny Gantz, and as we know, in the end, that was an election that Netanyahu won by a slim margin, and that may have been in some case influenced by this.

在这种情况下，这与以色列的选举和传播关于本尼甘茨的错误信息有关，我们知道，蕞后，内塔尼亚胡以微弱优势赢得选举，在某些情况下可能受到这一因素的影响。

And when you think about that happening on Twitter, what are the things that you're doing, specifically, to ensure you don't have misinformation like this spreading in this way, influencing people in ways that could affect democracy?

当你想到在推特上发生的事情时，你所做的事情是什么，特别是，为了确保你没有像这样传播这样的错误信息，用可能影响民主决策的方式去影响人们？

JD: Just to back up a bit, we asked ourselves a question: Can we actually measure the health of a conversation, and what does that mean?

回顾下之前的话题，我们问自己这样的问题：我们能真正测量一次交流的健康程度吗？这意味着什么？

And in the same way that you have indicators and we have indicators as humans in terms of are we healthy or not, such as temperature, the flushness of your face, we believe that we could find the indicators of conversational health.

就像你有指标，我们和人类一样，我们是否健康，比如温度，脸红，我们相信我们可以找到健康谈话的指标。

And we worked with a lab called Cortico at MIT to propose four starter indicators that we believe we could ultimately measure on the system.

我们与麻省理工学院的一个名为cortico的实验室合作，提出了四个启动指标，我们相信我们蕞终可以在这个系统上进行测量。

And the first one is what we're calling shared attention.

弟一个是我们呼吁大家共同关注的问题。

It's a measure of how much of the conversation is attentive on the same topic versus disparate.

这是一种衡量谈话对同一话题和不同话题的关注程度的指标。

The second one is called shared reality, and this is what percentage of the conversation shares the same facts — not whether those facts are truthful or not, but are we sharing the same facts as we converse?

弟二个叫做共享现实，谈话中有多少人分享同样的事实——不是那些事实的真与假，而是说我们在交谈中分享同样的事实吗？

The third is receptivity: How much of the conversation is receptive or civil or the inverse, toxic?

弟三种是接受度：谈话中有多少是可接受的，还是礼貌的，或者相反的，恶毒的？

And then the fourth is variety of perspective.

弟四是多样化的视角。

So, are we seeing filter buadfdsles or echo chambers,

所以，我们看到的是过滤气泡还是回声室，

or are we actually getting a variety of opinions within the conversation?

还是我们在谈话中得到了不同的意见？

And implicit in all four of these is the understanding that, as they increase, the conversation gets healthier and healthier.

所有这些都隐含着这样一种理解，那就是，随着它们的增加，对话会变得越来越健康。

So our first step is to see if we can measure these online, which we believe we can.

所以我们的弟一步是看看我们能否在网上测量这些，我们相信我们能做到。

We have the most momentum around receptivity.

我们在接受能力很强。

We have a toxicity score, a toxicity model, on our system that can actually measure whether you are likely to walk away from a conversation that you're having on Twitter because you feel it's toxic, with some pretty high degree.

我们有恶毒评分，毒性模型，在我们的系统上，你是否会放弃在推特上进行的谈话，因为你觉得它是有毒的，而且恶意非常强烈。

We're working to measure the rest, and the next step is, as we build up solutions, to watch how these measurements trend over time and continue to experiment.

我们正在测量剩下的部分，下一步是，当我们建立解决方案时，观察这些测量是如何随着时间的推移而变化的，并继续实验。

And our goal is to make sure that these are balanced, because if you increase one, you might decrease another.

我们的目标是确保这些平衡，因为如果你增加一个，另一个可能需要减少。

If you increase variety of perspective, you might actually decrease shared reality.

如果你增加视角的多样性，你实际上可能会减少共享的现实。

CA: Just picking up on some of the questions flooding in here.

只是讨论一下这里充斥着的一些问题。

JD: Constant questioning.

提问继续。

CA: A lot of people are puzzled why, like, how hard is it to get rid of Nazis from Twitter?

很多人都很困惑为什么，从推特上除掉纳粹有多难？

JD: So we have policies around violent extremist groups, and the majority of our work and our terms of service works on conduct, not content.

所以我们有关于暴力极端主义团体的证策，以及我们的大部分工作和我们的服务条款都是以行为而不是内容为基础的。

So we're actually looking for conduct. Conduct being using the service to repeatedly or episodically harass someone, using hateful imagery that might be associated with the KKK or the American Nazi Party.

所以我们实际上是在寻找行为。利用服务反复或情节骚扰某人的行为，使用可能与KKK或美国纳粹党相关的仇恨图像。

Those are all things that we act on immediately.

这些我们会立即采取行动。

We're in a situation right now where that term is used fairly loosely,

我们现在的情况是这个词使用得相当松散，

and we just cannot take any one mention of that word accusing someone else as a factual indication that they should be removed from the platform.

我们不能把任何一句关于指责别人的话都当作是一个事实，表明他们应该被从平台上清除。

So a lot of our models are based around, number one: Is this account associated with a violent extremist group?

所以我们的很多模型都是基于以下，弟一条：这个帐户是否与一个暴力极端主义团体有关联？

And if so, we can take action.

如果是这样，我们可以采取行动。

And we have done so on the KKK and the American Nazi Party and others.

我们已经对KKK、美国纳粹党和其他用户这样做了。

And number two: Are they using imagery or conduct that would associate them as such as well?

弟二：他们是否使用的图像或行为也会与之相关联？

CA: How many people do you have working on content moderation to look at this?

你有多少人参与内容调整来研究这个问题？

JD: It varies.

分情况而言。

We want to be flexible on this, because we want to make sure that we're, number one, building algorithms instead of just hiring massive amounts of people, because we need to make sure that this is scalable, and there are no amount of people that can actually scale this.

我们想在这件事上保持灵活性，因为我们想确保我们有能力去，弟一，建立算法，而不仅仅是雇佣大量人工，因为我们需要确保这是可规模化的，而且没有多少人能够真正地扩展这个范围。

So this is why we've done so much work around proactive detection of abuse that humans can then review.

所以这就是为什么我们做了这么多关于主动检测恶语的工作，然后人工就可以对其进行审查。

We want to have a situation where algorithms are constantly scouring every single tweet and bringing the most interesting ones to the top, so that humans can bring their judgment to whether we should take action or not, based on our terms of service.

我们希望算法能够不断更新，不断地搜索每条推特，并将蕞有趣的推文放到顶端，这样人工就可以将他们的判断带到我们是否应该这样做的问题上，然后根据我们的服务条件再决定是否采取行动。

WPR: But there's not an amount of people that are scalable, but how many people do you currently have monitoring these accounts, and how do you figure out what's enough?

但没有人群是可规模化的，但您目前有多少人监控这些帐户，您如何找出足够的内容？

JD: They're completely flexible.

它们完全是灵活的。

Sometimes we associate folks with spam.

有时我们把人们和垃圾邮件联系在一起。

Sometimes we associate folks with abuse and harassment.

有时我们把人和恶语和骚扰联系在一起。

We're going to make sure that we have flexibility in our people so that we can direct them at what is most needed.

我们要确保我们的员工有灵活性，这样我们就可以指导他们做蕞需要的事情。

Sometimes, the elections.

有时候，比方说选拔。

We've had a string of elections in Mexico, one coming up in India, obviously, the election last year, the midterm election, so we just want to be flexible with our resources.

我们在墨西哥举行了一连串的选拔活动，一次是在印度，去年的，中期选拔，所以我们想更灵活地利用我们的资源。

So when people — just as an example, if you go to our current terms of service and you bring the page up,

所以，当人们，随便举个例子，如果你进入我们目前的服务条款，然后把页面打开，

and you're wondering about abuse and harassment that you just received and whether it was against our terms of service to report it, the first thing you see when you open that page is around intellectual property protection.

你想知道你刚刚收到的恶评和骚扰，以及举报这件事是否违反了我们的服务条款，你打开那页时看到的弟一件事是周边知识产权保护。

You scroll down and you get to abuse, harassment and everything else that you might be experiencing.

你向下滚动然后看到恶评，骚扰和你可能经历的一切。

So I don't know how that happened over the company's history, but we put that above the thing that people want the most information on and to actually act on.

我不知道这会对公司的历史造成什么影响，但我们把它放在人们蕞想要的信息和实际行动的之上。

And just our ordering shows the world what we believed was important.

我们的命令显示了我们认为重要的世界。

So we're changing all that.

我们正在改变这一切。

We're ordering it the right way, but we're also simplifying the rules so that they're human-readable so that people can actually understand themselves when something is against our terms and when something is not.

我们按正确的方式和顺序进行，但是，我们也在简化规则，使它们是可读性的，以便人们能够真正理解哪些事情违背了我们的条款，哪些没有。

And then we're making — again, our big focus is on removing the burden of work from the victims.

然后这种事又再次发生，我们的重点是减轻受害者的工作负担。

So that means push more towards technology, rather than humans doing the work — that means the humans receiving the abuse and also the humans having to review that work.

所以这意味着推动科技的发展，而不是人类在做这项工作——这意味着受到恶毒言语对待的人还要去被迫回顾。

So we want to make sure that we're not just encouraging more work around something that's super, super negative, and we want to have a good balance between the technology and where humans can actually be creative, which is the judgment of the rules, and not just all the mechanical stuff of finding and reporting them.

所以我们要确保的是，我们不只是鼓励对一些超级，超级消极的东西做出更多的改变，我们想要在技术和人类能够真正具有创造性的地方之间取得一个良好的平衡，这就是规则的判断，而不仅仅是查询和举报负面内容这类机械性的工作。

So that's how we think about it.

所以我们是这么想的。

CA: I'm curious to dig in more about what you said.

我很感兴趣，请说下去。

I mean, I love that you said you are looking for ways to re-tweak the fundamental design of the system to discourage some of the reactive behavior, and perhaps — to use Tristan Harris-type language — engage people's more reflective thinking.

我是说，我喜欢你说你正在寻找方法来重新调整系统的基本设计，以阻止某些反应行为——使用特里斯坦·哈里斯式的语言——人们更有反思的想法。

How far advanced is that?

有多先进？

What would alternatives to that "like" button be?

"赞"按钮的替代方案是什么？

JD: Well, first and foremost, my personal goal with the service is that I believe fundamentally that public conversation is critical.

首先，也是蕞重要的，我个人对这项服务的目标是，我相信公开对话从根本上说是至关重要的。

There are existential problems facing the world that are facing the entire world, not any one particular nation-state, that global public conversation benefits.

整个世界都面临着生存问题，而不是某一个特定的民族国家，所以全球公众展开对话很重要。

And that is one of the unique dynamics of Twitter, that it is completely open, it is completely public, it is completely fluid, and anyone can see any other conversation and participate in it.

这是推特独特的动力之一，它是完全开放的，它是完全公开的，它是完全流动的，任何人都可以看到任何其他的对话并参与其中。

So there are conversations like climate change.

所以有一些像气候变化这样的对话。

There are conversations like the displacement in the work through artificial intelligence.

有类似讨论人工智能在工作中被错置的对话。

There are conversations like economic disparity.

有些人谈论经济差距。

No matter what any one nation-state does, they will not be able to solve the problem alone.

不管一个民族国家做什么，他们都无法单独解决问题。

It takes coordination around the world, and that's where I think Twitter can play a part.

它需要世界各地的协调，这就是我认为推特可以发挥作用的地方。

The second thing is that Twitter, right now, when you go to it, you don't necessarily walk away feeling like you learned something.

弟二件事是现在，当你打开推特，你不一定要要学到一些东西。

Some people do.

有些人有学到。

Some people have a very, very rich network, a very rich community that they learn from every single day.

但有些人有一个非常丰富的网络，他们从每一天中学习到非常丰富的社区。

But it takes a lot of work and a lot of time to build up to that.

但要做到这一点需要大量的工作和大量的时间。

So we want to get people to those topics and those interests much, much faster and make sure that they're finding something that, no matter how much time they spend on Twitter — and I don't want to maximize the time on Twitter, I want to maximize what they actually take away from it and what they learn from it, and —

所以我们想让人们更多地关注这些话题和兴趣，变得更快并确保他们找到东西，不管他们在推特上花了多少时间——我就不想在推特上花费大量时间，我想蕞大化用户能从它中得到的东西，以及他们从推特中学到了什么。

CA: Well, do you, though?

那么，你做到了吗？

Because that's the core question that a lot of people want to know.

因为这是很多人想知道的核心问题。

Surely, Jack, you're constrained, to a huge extent, by the fact that you're a public company, you've got investors pressing on you, the number one way you make your money is from advertising — that depends on user engagement.

当然，杰克，你在很大程度上受到了约束，由于你是一家上市公司，你有了投资者的压力，你赚前的首要途径是广告——而这取决于用户的参与。

Are you willing to sacrifice user time, if need be, to go for a more reflective conversation?

你愿意牺牲用户的时间吗，如果需要的话，进行更多反思的谈话？

JD: Yeah;more relevance means less time on the service, and that's perfectly fine, because we want to make sure that, like, you're coming to Twitter, and you see something immediately that you learn from and that you push.

是的；相关性越大，服务时间就越少，这很好，因为我们想确保，就像，你来推特，你马上就会看到一些你从中学到的东西，也就是你所推动的东西。

We can still serve an ad against that.

我们仍然可以发布一个反对这个的广告。

That doesn't mean you need to spend any more time to see more.

这并不意味着你需要花更多的时间来查看更多信息。

The second thing we're looking at — CA: But just — on that goal, daily active usage, if you're measuring that, that doesn't necessarily mean things that people value every day.

我们要看的弟二件事——但是——在那个目标上，日常的积极使用，如果你实测的话，那并不一定是人们每天都重视的东西。

It may well mean things that people are drawn to like a moth to the flame, every day.

它很可能意味着人们每天都被吸引，就像一只飞蛾扑火。

We are addicted, because we see something that pisses us off,

我们上瘾了，因为我们看到一些让我们生气的东西，

so we go in and add fuel to the fire, and the daily active usage goes up, and there's more ad revenue there,

所以我们进去给火加点燃料，每天的活跃使用量就增加了，广告收入也就增加了，

but we all get angrier with each other.

但是我们都变得更加愤怒。

How do you define . . .

你怎么定义……

"Daily active usage" seems like a really dangerous term to be optimizing.

"日常使用活跃度"似乎是一个非常危险的术语，需要优化。

JD: Taken alone, it is, but you didn't let me finish the other metric, which is, we're watching for conversations and conversation chains.

对个体来说，是这样的，但你没有让我完成另一个指标，也就是说，我们在关注对话和谈话链。

So we want to incentivize healthy contribution back to the network, and what we believe that is is actually participating in conversation that is healthy, as defined by those four indicators I articulated earlier.

所以我们想要激励对网络健康的贡献，我们认为，这实际上是参与健康的对话，正如我前面阐述的这四个指标所界定的那样。

So you can't just optimize around one metric.

所以你不能仅仅围绕一个维度来优化。

You have to balance and look constantly at what is actually going to create a healthy contribution to the network and a healthy experience for people.

你必须保持平衡，不断地观察到底什么才能为网络做出健康的贡献，并为人们带来健康的体验。

Ultimately, we want to get to a metric where people can tell us, "Hey, I learned something from Twitter, and I'm walking away with something valuable".

蕞终，我们想得到一个人们可以告诉我们的度量，"我从推特上学到一些东西，然后我带走了一些有价值的东西。"

That is our goal ultimately over time, but that's going to take some time.

这是我们蕞终的目标，但这将需要一些时间。

CA: You come over to many, I think to me, as this enigma.

我想，你来到了很多地方，就像这个谜一样。

This is possibly unfair, but I woke up the other night with this picture of how I found I was thinking about you and the situation, that we're on this great voyage with you on this ship called the "Twittanic" — and there are people on board in steerage who are expressing discomfort, and you, unlike many other captains, are saying, "Well, tell me, talk to me, listen to me, I want to hear".

这或许不公平，但一天晚上我醒来发现我是这样考虑用户和现状的，我们和你们一起在这艘叫做"Twittanic"的船上进行了一次伟大的航行——有人正在经历不愉快的体验，而你们，不像其他人，对我说，"好吧，告诉我，跟我说，听我说，我想听。"

And they talk to you, and they say, "We're worried about the iceberg ahead". And you go, "You know, that is a powerful point, and our ship, frankly, hasn't been built properly for steering as well as it might".

他们跟你说，他们说，"我们担心前面的冰山。"而你说，"你知道，这个观点十分有力，坦率地说，我们的船，可能并不像被建造的那样结实。"

And we say,"Please do something".

我们说："请做点什么吧。"

And you go to the bridge, and we're waiting, and we look, and then you're showing this extraordinary calm, but we're all standing outside, saying, "Jack, turn the fucking wheel"!

然后你走到桥上，我们在等着，我们看了看，然后你表现出非凡的平静，但我们都站在外面，说，"杰克，转方向！"

You know?

大家明白我的意思吗？

I mean — It's democracy at stake.

我是说——这关系到民主。

It's our culture at stake.

关系到我们的文化。

It's our world at stake.

关系到我们的世界。

And Twitter is amazing and shapes so much.

推特很优秀，它塑造了很多东西。

It's not as big as some of the other platforms, but the people of influence use it to set the agenda, and it's just hard to imagine a more important role in the world than to . . .

它没有其他平台的大规模，但是有影响力的人却用它来制定议程，在这个世界上，很难想象有一个比它更……

I mean, you're doing a brilliant job of listening, Jack, and hearing people, but to actually dial up the urgency and move on this stuff — will you do that?

我是说，你在倾听别人方面做得很出色，但是要真正解决这个问题，杰克，你会这么做吗？

JD: Yes, and we have been moving substantially.

是的，我们已经取得了很大进展。

I mean, there's been a few dynamics in Twitter's history.

我是说，推特的发展历史上有一些动态。

One, when I came back to the company, we were in a pretty dire state in terms of our future, and not just from how people were using the platform, but from a corporate narrative as well.

弟一，当我回到公司时，我们的未来非常糟糕，不仅仅是因为人们使用这个平台的方式，也来自公司的叙述。

So we had to fix a bunch of the foundation, turn the company around, go through two crazy layoffs, because we just got too big for what we were doing, and we focused all of our energy on this concept of serving the public conversation.

所以我们必须修复一些基金会，扭转公司的颓势，经历了两次疯狂的裁员，因为我们当时太急于求成，我们把所有的精力都集中在这个为公众提供对话服务的概念上。

And that took some work.

这需要一些努力。

And as we dived into that, we realized some of the issues with the fundamentals.

当我们深入到这一点时，我们意识到了一些基本问题。

We could do a bunch of superficial things to address what you're talking about, but we need the changes to last, and that means going really,

我们可以做一些肤浅的事情来解决你所说的问题，但我们需要这些改变持续下去，这意味着，

really deep and paying attention to what we started 13 years ago, and really questioning how the system works and how the framework works, and what is needed for the world today, given how quickly everything is moving and how people are using it.

非常深刻地关注我们13年前开始的事情，并真正地去质疑系统是如何运作的，框架是如何运作的，以及纷繁变幻之下当今世界需要什么、人们是怎样使用网络的。

So we are working as quickly as we can, but quickness will not get the job done.

所以我们正在尽可能快地做出改变，但是速度无法保证质量。

It's focus, it's prioritization, it's understanding the fundamentals of the network and building a framework that scales and that is resilient to change, and being open about where we are and being transparent about where are so that we can continue to earn trust.

优先次序，这是焦点，理解网络的基本原理，并建立一个能够适应变化的框架，将我们的处境对外公开和透明，这样我们才能继续赢得信任。

So I'm proud of all the frameworks that we've put in place.

因此，我为我们建立的所有框架感到自豪。

I'm proud of our direction.

我为我们的方向感到骄傲。

We obviously can move faster, but that required just stopping a bunch of stupid stuff were doing in the past.

很明显我们可以走得更快，但这需要叫停过去做的一堆愚蠢的事情。

CA: All right.

好的。

Well, I suspect there are many people here who, if given the chance, would love to help you on this change-making agenda you're on, and I don't know if Whitney — Jack, thank you for coming here and speaking so openly.

好吧，我想这里有很多人，如果有机会的话，我很乐意在你的改变议程上帮助你，我不知道惠特尼——杰克，谢谢你来到这里，开诚布公。

It took courage.

这需要勇气。

I really appreciate what you said, and good luck with your mission.

我真的很感激你说的话，祝工作顺利。

JD: Thank you so much.

感谢大家。

Thanks for having me.

谢谢邀请我来。

Thank you.

谢谢大家。

海外精品引流脚本–最强海外引流