Jon Gosier: The problem with "trickle-down techonomics"

翻译人员: Jennifer Zhang 校对人员: Muyun Zhou

As a software developer and technologist,

作为软件开发者和技术专家，

I've worked on a number of civic technology projects

我在过去几年中参与了多个 民用科技项目。

over the years.

Civic tech is sometimes referred to as tech for good,

民用科技有时又被称为科技善举，

using technology to solve humanitarian problems.

是使用科技手段来解决民生问题。

This is in 2010 in Uganda,

这是2010年在乌干达，

working on a solution that allowed local populations

我们帮当地民众解决

to avoid government surveillance on their mobile phones

如何防止政府通过监控人们手机

for expressing dissent.

来控制不同政见的问题。

That same technology was deployed later in North Africa

相同的技术后来在北非得以使用

for similar purposes to help activists stay connected

也用于类似的目的， 来帮助社会活动家保持联络

when governments were deliberately shutting off connectivity

尤其是当政府以故意切断联络

as a means of population control.

来作为控制民众的手段。

But over the years, as I have thought about these technologies

而多年以来，我常常想到 这些科技

and the things that I work on,

以及我所做的这些事情，

a question kind of nags in the back of my mind, which is,

有个问题一直让我耿耿于怀。

what if we're wrong about the virtues of technology,

我们有没有可能高估了科技的好处，

and if it sometimes actively hurts

会不会有些技术实际上伤害了

the communities that we're intending to help?

我们想去帮助的群体？

The tech industry around the world tends to operate under similar assumptions

全球的科技行业都惯于在这个假设下运营，

that if we build great things,

就是如果我们做出好的东西来，

it will positively affect everyone.

它就会对每个人有积极的影响。

Eventually, these innovations will get out and find everyone.

这些创新最终会走进千家万户。

But that's not always the case.

但其实并不一定如此。

我把这种盲目的拥护称作“滴漏科技”，

I like to call this blind championing of technology "trickle-down techonomics,"

to borrow a phrase. (Laughter)

借用一个说法。（笑声）

We tend to think that if we design things for the select few,

我们认为，如果我们为少数人设计产品，

eventually those technologies will reach everyone,

最终这些技术会波及到所有人，

and that's not always the case.

其实并不一定是这样的。

Technology and innovation behaves a lot like wealth and capital.

科技和创新很像财富和资本。

They tend to consolidate in the hands of the few,

它们通常集聚在少数人手中，

and sometimes they find their way out into the hands of the many.

有时可能普及到大众。

And so most of you aren't tackling oppressive regimes on the weekends,

既然在座的大多不会在周末去推翻高压政府

so I wanted to think of a few examples that might be a little bit more relatable.

我在这里举一些更相关的例子。

In the world of wearables and smartphones and apps,

在这个充满智能手表、手机 和应用软件的今天，

there's a big movement to track people's personal health

有一个大趋势是追踪人们的健康，

with applications that track the number of calories that you burn

利用应用软件来记录 你消耗了多少卡路里，

or whether you're sitting too much or walking enough.

或是你是否坐的太久了， 有没有走够路。

These technologies make patient intake in medical facilities much more efficient,

这种技术能帮助医疗机构 更高效的用药，

and in turn, these medical facilities

而反过来，这些医疗机构

也开始预期这种效率。

are starting to expect these types of efficiencies.

随着这些数字工具进入医疗室，

As these digital tools find their way into medical rooms,

and they become digitally ready,

这些机构也日益数字化。

what happens to the digitally invisible?

那些无法实现数字化的怎么办？

What does the medical experience look like

就医经历对于那些

for someone who doesn't have the $400 phone or watch

买不起四百块钱的手机 或手表的人来说会是怎样？

tracking their every movement?

他们怎么记录他们的一举一动呢？

Do they now become a burden on the medical system?

他们会否成为医疗系统的累赘？

Is their experience changed?

他们的经历会否改变呢？

In the world of finance, Bitcoin and crypto-currencies

在金融界，比特币和加密货币

are revolutionizing the way we move money around the world,

革新着货币流通的方式，

but the challenge with these technologies

但这些技术面临的挑战

is the barrier to entry is incredibly high, right?

是它们准入的门槛极高，对不对？

You need access to the same phones, devices, connectivity,

你必须要有同款的手机， 设备，连网能力，

and even where you don't, where you can find a proxy agent,

或者你没有的话，你得有一个代理方，

usually they require a certain amount of capital to participate.

通常他们也会收取一定的费用。

And so the question that I ask myself is, what happens to the last community

所以我常问自己的问题是， 最后一个用纸币的社会会怎样，

using paper notes when the rest of the world moves to digital currency?

当余下的世界都转用电子货币以后？

Another example from my hometown in Philadelphia:

另一个例子来做我的家乡费城：

I recently went to the public library there,

我最近去了那儿的图书馆，

and they are facing an existential crisis.

他们面临一个生死存亡的危机。

Public funding is dwindling,

政府拨款日益萎缩，

they have to reduce their footprint to stay open and stay relevant,

他们不得不以减少馆点 来保证生存及不断更新，

and so one of the ways they're going about this

其中的一个措施是

is digitizing a number of the books and moving them to the cloud.

把一些书籍数字化， 把它们储存到云端。

This is great for most kids. Right?

这对大多数孩子来说是好事，对不对？

You can check out books from home,

你可以在家借书，

you can research on the way to school or from school,

你可以在上学或放学路上查资料，

but these are really two big assumptions,

但是，这里面有两大假设，

that one, you have access at home,

第一，你在家能上网，

and two, that you have access to a mobile phone,

第二，你拥有一个手机，

and in Philadelphia, many kids do not.

而在费城，多数孩子两者都没有。

So what does their education experience look like

这样的话，他们的求学经历会是怎样，

in the wake of a completely cloud-based library,

在这样一个完全云端的图书馆体系下？

what used to be considered such a basic part of education?

尤其是图书馆一向被视为 教育系统不可或缺的一部分。

How do they stay competitive?

他们如何能保持竞争力？

A final example from across the world in East Africa:

最后一个例子来自 世界另一端的东非：

there's been a huge movement to digitize land ownership rights,

一个大趋势是把土地所有权数字化，

for a number of reasons.

这样做是基于各种原因。

Migrant communities, older generations dying off,

迁徙型的社会， 年长的一代逐渐逝去，

and ultimately poor record-keeping

以及糟糕的档案记录

have led to conflicts over who owns what.

使得各方对所有权各持己见。

And so there was a big movement to put all this information online,

所以那里在推行 把这些信息都放在网上，

to track all the ownership of these plots of land,

记录这些土地的所有权，

put them in the cloud, and give them to the communities.

然后存储在云端，并交还给社区。

But actually, the unintended consequence of this

但实际上，这种做法 计划外的产物是，

has been that venture capitalists, investors, real estate developers,

风险资本家，投资者，房地产开发商

have swooped in and they've begun buying up these plots of land

都涌了进来，开始大量买地

right out from under these communities,

从当地人手里把地都买了，

because they have access to the technologies

因为他们能接触到这个科技，

and the connectivity that makes that possible.

并且有能力上网。

So that's the common thread that connects these examples,

所有这些例子的共同点，

the unintended consequences of the tools and the technologies that we make.

是我们创造的这些工具 和科技的意外后果。

As engineers, as technologists,

作为工程师和技术人员，

we sometimes prefer efficiency over efficacy.

我们有时放弃功效而选择效率。

We think more about doing things than the outcomes of what we are doing.

我们想要做事情， 却不考虑事情的结果。

This needs to change.

这需要改变。

We have a responsibility to think about the outcomes of the technologies we build,

我们要对科技的后果负责，

especially as they increasingly control the world in which we live.

特别是当科技越来越多的 控制我们的生活。

In the late '90s,

在九十年代末的时候，

there was a big push for ethics in the world of investment and banking.

投资和银行界都在推进道德。

I think in 2014, we're long overdue for a similar movement

我想在2014年， 我们早也该有一个类似的推进运动

in the area of tech and technology.

这回是在科技领域。

So, I just encourage you, as you are all thinking about the next big thing,

所以，我鼓励你们， 当你们在考虑下一个大手笔，

as entrepreneurs, as CEOs, as engineers, as makers,

作为企业家，首席执行官，工程师，创造者，

that you think about the unintended consequences

请考虑一下计划外的后果

of the things that you're building,

because the real innovation is in finding ways to include everyone.

因为真正的创新是想办法造福每个人。

Thank you.

谢谢。

(Applause)

（鼓掌）