TEDGlobal 2005
Clay Shirky: Institutions vs. collaboration
克莱·舍基谈机构与合作
Filmed:
Readability: 4.4
1,321,687 views
2005年，克莱·舍基在他富有预见性的演讲中讲述了封闭的团体和公司会如何被松散型系统所代替。在此种松散型系统中，小小的奉献者起到很大作用，灵活的协作将代替严密的计划。
Clay Shirky - Social Media Theorist
Clay Shirky argues that the history of the modern world could be rendered as the history of ways of arguing, where changes in media change what sort of arguments are possible -- with deep social and political implications. Full bio
Clay Shirky argues that the history of the modern world could be rendered as the history of ways of arguing, where changes in media change what sort of arguments are possible -- with deep social and political implications. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:12
How do groups get anything done? Right?
0
0
3000
一群人要如何完成某项任务？
00:15
How do you organize a group of individuals
1
3000
2000
如何管理一个团体
00:17
so that the output of the group
2
5000
2000
才能使其产出
00:19
is something coherent and of lasting value,
3
7000
2000
和谐一致并且富有长久价值
00:21
instead of just being chaos?
4
9000
2000
而非混乱不堪？
00:23
And the economic framing of that problem
5
11000
3000
此问题在经济学术语中，
00:26
is called coordination costs.
6
14000
2000
被称为“协调成本”。
00:28
And a coordination cost is essentially all of the financial
7
16000
4000
协调成本基本上是
00:32
or institutional difficulties in arranging group output.
8
20000
4000
在安排群体产出时，所遇到的财务和机构问题。
00:36
And we've had a classic answer for coordination costs,
9
24000
3000
对于协调成本，我们有一个经典的答案，
00:39
which is, if you want to coordinate the work of a group of people,
10
27000
3000
那就是，如果你想要协调一个一群人参与的工作
00:42
you start an institution, right? You raise some resources.
11
30000
2000
首先要成立一个机构，对吧？收集一些资源。
00:44
You found something. It can be private or public.
12
32000
3000
建立一个组织。这个组织可以是私有的或公共的，
00:47
It can be for profit or not profit. It can be large or small.
13
35000
3000
也可以是营利或非营利性质的，大型或小型的组织。
00:50
But you get these resources together.
14
38000
2000
但你筹集好所需的资源
00:52
You found an institution, and you use the institution
15
40000
3000
成立了一个机构，
00:55
to coordinate the activities of the group.
16
43000
2000
便可以利用这个机构去协调组织活动。
00:57
More recently, because the cost of letting groups
17
45000
4000
就在近期，因为
01:01
communicate with each other has fallen through the floor --
18
49000
3000
用于机构成员之间交流的花费下跌到谷底 －－
01:04
and communication costs are one of the big
19
52000
2000
而交流所需花费是协调工作中的重要组成部分，
01:06
inputs to coordination -- there has been a second answer,
20
54000
4000
从而，人们给出了第二种解决策略，
01:10
which is to put the cooperation into the infrastructure,
21
58000
4000
即把合作设计到机构的底子里，
01:14
to design systems that coordinate the output
22
62000
3000
设计一种系统，
01:17
of the group as a by-product of the operating of the system,
23
65000
3000
在其运作的同时协调其产出成果
01:20
without regard to institutional models.
24
68000
3000
而不再诉诸于机构的模式。
01:23
So, that's what I want to talk about today.
25
71000
2000
这就是我今天所要探讨的内容。
01:25
I'm going to illustrate it with some fairly concrete examples,
26
73000
2000
我将用一些实例来解释这个观点，
01:27
but always pointing to the broader themes.
27
75000
4000
但是这些实例都表明同一个更开阔的主旨。
01:31
So, I'm going to start by trying to answer a question
28
79000
2000
首先，我来回答一个问题，
01:33
that I know each of you will have asked yourself at some point or other,
29
81000
2000
我知道你们每一个人一定向自己或别人提出过这个问题，
01:35
and which the Internet is purpose-built to answer,
30
83000
2000
而网络也正是为了解决这个问题而建立的，
01:37
which is, where can I get a picture of a roller-skating mermaid?
31
85000
4000
这问题就是：我从哪儿能找到一张美人鱼滑旱冰的照片？
01:41
So, in New York City, on the first Saturday of every summer,
32
89000
4000
在纽约，每年夏季的第一个周六
01:45
Coney Island, our local, charmingly run-down amusement park,
33
93000
3000
在我们当地萧条的游乐园——科尼岛
01:48
hosts the Mermaid Parade. It's an amateur parade;
34
96000
3000
都会为业余爱好者举办一次美人鱼游行。
01:51
people come from all over the city; people get all dressed up.
35
99000
3000
来自城市各个角落的居民都会盛装打扮，
01:54
Some people get less dressed up.
36
102000
2000
当然也有些人不怎么“装扮”。
01:56
Young and old, dancing in the streets.
37
104000
3000
老幼相携，在大街上跳舞，
01:59
Colorful characters, and a good time is had by all.
38
107000
3000
大家一同享受缤纷的角色与欢乐的氛围。
02:02
And what I want to call your attention to is not the Mermaid Parade itself,
39
110000
2000
虽说游行本身也不错，但是我更想让大家关注的
02:04
charming though it is, but rather to these photos.
40
112000
3000
却是这些照片。
02:07
I didn't take them. How did I get them?
41
115000
3000
我没有亲自去照这些照片，但是我是怎么得到它们的呢？
02:10
And the answer is: I got them from Flickr.
42
118000
2000
答案是：我是从Flickr上找到的。
02:12
Flickr is a photo-sharing service
43
120000
3000
Flickr是一个照片分享的网站
02:15
that allows people to take photos, upload them,
44
123000
2000
人们可以在此上传自己拍摄的照片
02:17
share them over the Web and so forth.
45
125000
1000
与其他人分享等等。
02:18
Recently, Flickr has added an additional function called tagging.
46
126000
4000
最近，Flickr新增了一项叫做“标签”的功能，
02:22
Tagging was pioneered by Delicious and Joshua Schachter.
47
130000
3000
此功能首先由Del.icio.us发明人Joshua Schachter推广开来的
02:25
Delicious is a social bookmarking service.
48
133000
2000
Del.icio.us是一个社会书签服务。
02:27
Tagging is a cooperative infrastructure answer to classification.
49
135000
5000
专业化的分类管理是传统的解决方案，而加标签即是合作性的基础建设。
02:32
Right? If I had given this talk last year,
50
140000
3000
如果我去年演讲这个内容，
02:35
I couldn't do what I just did,
51
143000
2000
我是无法将刚才这一切展现给大家的，
02:37
because I couldn't have found those photos.
52
145000
2000
因为我一定找不到这些照片。
02:39
But instead of saying,
53
147000
2000
但是
02:41
we need to hire a professional class of librarians
54
149000
2000
我们不需要一群专业的图书管理员
02:43
to organize these photos once they're uploaded,
55
151000
2000
在上传之后对这些照片进行分类管理，
02:45
Flickr simply turned over to the users
56
153000
3000
Flickr将这个问题移交到各个用户，
02:48
the ability to characterize the photos.
57
156000
2000
从而完成了对这些照片的分类。
02:50
So, I was able to go in and draw down photos that had been tagged
58
158000
3000
于是，我可以找到那些有“美人鱼游行”标签的相片。
02:53
"Mermaid Parade." There were 3,100 photos taken by 118 photographers,
59
161000
6000
有这个标签的相片共有3100张，分别来自118个摄影者，
02:59
all aggregated and then put under this nice, neat name,
60
167000
3000
全部归于这个简明的标签之下，
03:02
shown in reverse chronological order.
61
170000
2000
按上传时间由近到远排列。
03:04
And I was then able to go and retrieve them
62
172000
2000
这样我就可以检索到它们
03:06
to give you that little slideshow.
63
174000
2000
并给大家做刚才那样的演示了。
03:08
Now, what hard problem is being solved here?
64
176000
3000
那么，在这里我们解决了一个怎么样的难题呢？
03:11
And it's -- in the most schematic possible view,
65
179000
2000
从概略的可能性观点来看，
03:13
it's a coordination problem, right?
66
181000
2000
是一个协作的问题。
03:15
There are a large number of people on the Internet,
67
183000
2000
网络上的人太多了，
03:17
a very small fraction of them have photos of the Mermaid Parade.
68
185000
4000
只有一小部分人拥有美人鱼游行的照片。
03:21
How do we get those people together to contribute that work?
69
189000
4000
问题是我们怎样能将这一群人组织到一起，让他们提供这些照片。
03:25
The classic answer is to form an institution, right?
70
193000
3000
一个传统的答案便是建立一个机构，对吧？
03:28
To draw those people into some prearranged structure
71
196000
4000
用这个机构来吸引这些人到一个预先设计好的组织形式，
03:32
that has explicit goals.
72
200000
2000
这个组织形式拥有明确的目标。
03:34
And I want to call your attention to
73
202000
2000
我想提醒你注意到
03:36
some of the side effects of going the institutional route.
74
204000
5000
走机构这条路的一些弊端。
03:41
First of all, when you form an institution,
75
209000
2000
首先，建立一个机构，
03:43
you take on a management problem, right?
76
211000
2000
就会产生管理上的问题。
03:45
No good just hiring employees,
77
213000
2000
不仅仅是雇用员工而已，
03:47
you also have to hire other employees to manage those employees
78
215000
3000
你还必须雇用一些人员来管理管理那些员工
03:50
and to enforce the goals of the institution and so forth.
79
218000
3000
来执行实现机构的目标，等等。
03:53
Secondly, you have to bring structure into place.
80
221000
3000
其次，还需要建立层级结构
03:56
Right? You have to have economic structure.
81
224000
2000
一个机构需要有经济结构，
03:58
You have to have legal structure.
82
226000
2000
法制结构，
04:00
You have to have physical structure.
83
228000
1000
和具体的实体结构。
04:01
And that creates additional costs.
84
229000
3000
这些都会造成额外的成本。
04:04
Third, forming an institution is inherently exclusionary.
85
232000
4000
再次，建立一个机构本身就具有排他性。
04:08
You notice we haven't got everybody who has a photo.
86
236000
4000
你会注意到，不是每个拥有照片的人都在我们的机构里。
04:12
You can't hire everyone in a company, right?
87
240000
3000
一个机构是不可能雇用所有人的，对不对？
04:15
You can't recruit everyone into a governmental organization.
88
243000
3000
你是不可能将所有人都纳入一个组织中去的。
04:18
You have to exclude some people.
89
246000
2000
这就决定了有一些人会被排除在外。
04:20
And fourth, as a result of that exclusion,
90
248000
2000
第四，由这个排除性所造成的结果，
04:22
you end up with a professional class. Look at the change here.
91
250000
4000
我们最终只拥有一个专业摄影组。请注意这里的改变－－
04:26
We've gone from people with photos to photographers.
92
254000
3000
从拥有照片的广大群众，变成了专业摄影师们。
04:29
Right? We've created a professional class of photographers
93
257000
4000
是吧？我们成立了一个
04:33
whose goal is to go out and photograph the Mermaid Parade,
94
261000
2000
以拍摄美人鱼游行为目的的摄影师团体，
04:35
or whatever else they're sent out to photograph.
95
263000
5000
或者不管他们去拍摄什么
04:40
When you build cooperation into the infrastructure,
96
268000
3000
但是，当你将协作放入基础建设中，
04:43
which is the Flickr answer,
97
271000
3000
也就得到了Flickr
04:46
you can leave the people where they are
98
274000
2000
（Flickr拥有广大群众并且）让人们做自己的事，
04:48
and you take the problem to the individuals, rather than
99
276000
4000
让每个个体去解决这个问题，
04:52
moving the individuals to the problem.
100
280000
1000
而非让每个人被这一个问题牵着鼻子走。
04:53
You arrange the coordination in the group, and by doing that
101
281000
7000
只需要安排协调这些群众，
05:00
you get the same outcome, without the institutional difficulties.
102
288000
4000
便省去了组建机构一切难题，于此同时，得到同样的产出。
05:04
You lose the institutional imperative.
103
292000
2000
当然，你会失去机构的控制力量，
05:06
You lose the right to shape people's work when it's volunteer effort,
104
294000
3000
当这一切工作都是志愿者在完成，你就不会拥有令他们优化工作质量的权利，
05:09
but you also shed the institutional cost,
105
297000
3000
但是与此同时也减少了建立机构的成本，
05:12
which gives you greater flexibility.
106
300000
2000
从而让令你拥有更大的灵活性。
05:14
What Flickr does is it replaces planning with coordination.
107
302000
5000
Flickr所做的正是用协调取代规划
05:19
And this is a general aspect of these cooperative systems.
108
307000
3000
这是合作性系统中的普遍方面。
05:22
Right. You'll have experienced this in your life
109
310000
3000
人们在生活中，一定有这样的经历－－
05:25
whenever you bought your first mobile phone,
110
313000
2000
当你买了第一台手机之后，
05:27
and you stopped making plans.
111
315000
2000
便不再做计划。
05:29
You just said, "I'll call you when I get there."
112
317000
2000
你只需要说，“我到了给你电话”，或者
05:31
"Call me when you get off work." Right?
113
319000
2000
“下班了给我打电话”。是吧？
05:33
That is a point-to-point replacement of coordination with planning.
114
321000
5000
这个点对点的协调行为取代了对事情进行规划。
05:38
Right. We're now able to do that kind of thing with groups.
115
326000
4000
那么现在，我们可以对一群人进行同样的协调。
05:42
To say instead of, we must make an advance plan,
116
330000
3000
不需要再强调“我们一定要做个先进的计划”，
05:45
we must have a five-year projection
117
333000
1000
“我们要对维基百科未来的五年会怎样有个设想“
05:46
of where the Wikipedia is going to be, or whatever,
118
334000
3000
什么的，
05:49
you can just say, let's coordinate the group effort,
119
337000
3000
只需要说，让我们协调这个有组织性的活动，
05:52
and let's deal with it as we go,
120
340000
2000
并在这个活动的过程中进行协调，
05:54
because we're now well-enough coordinated
121
342000
1000
因为，我们现在可以充分地彼此协调，
05:55
that we don't have to take on the problems of deciding in advance what to do.
122
343000
5000
所以不需要把问题都集中在预先决策上。
06:00
So here's another example. This one's somewhat more somber.
123
348000
3000
我这有另外一个例子。这个例子令人更郁闷。
06:03
These are photos on Flickr tagged "Iraq."
124
351000
2000
这些是Flickr上标注有伊拉克的照片。
06:09
And everything that was hard about the coordination cost
125
357000
3000
从协调成本的困难程度讲，
06:12
with the Mermaid Parade is even harder here.
126
360000
3000
这个比美人鱼游行要困难的多。
06:15
There are more pictures. There are more photographers.
127
363000
3000
有更多的照片，也有更多的摄影师参与。
06:18
It's taken over a wider geographic area.
128
366000
4000
这个过程跨越了更广泛的地域，
06:22
The photos are spread out over a longer period of time.
129
370000
2000
这些照片也分布在一个更广泛的时间段中。
06:24
And worst of all, that figure at the bottom,
130
372000
4000
最糟糕的是，看看这个在下方的数据，
06:28
approximately ten photos per photographer, is a lie.
131
376000
4000
“每个摄影师平均贡献了10张照片”，这并不是真的。
06:32
It's mathematically true,
132
380000
2000
从数学角度讲，这个数据是真实的，
06:34
but it doesn't really talk about anything important --
133
382000
2000
但是这并不说明任何实质性问题，
06:36
because in these systems, the average isn't really what matters.
134
384000
5000
因为在这个系统中，平均值并不是个重要的因素。
06:41
What matters is this.
135
389000
2000
下面我来讲一下真正重要的是什么：
06:43
This is a graph of photographs tagged Iraq
136
391000
5000
这是个在Flickr上标注有伊拉克图片的曲线图，
06:48
as taken by the 529 photographers who contributed the 5,445 photos.
137
396000
6000
一共由529个摄影者上传了5445张照片。
06:54
And it's ranked in order of number of photos taken per photographer.
138
402000
5000
以摄影者拍上传照片的数量进行排序。
06:59
You can see here, over at the end,
139
407000
2000
你可以在这一端看到，
07:01
our most prolific photographer has taken around 350 photos,
140
409000
4000
贡献最多的摄影者上传了350张照片，
07:05
and you can see there's a few people who have taken hundreds of photos.
141
413000
4000
有一小部分人上传了几百张照片，
07:09
Then there's dozens of people who've taken dozens of photos.
142
417000
3000
还有数十个摄影者上传了数十张照片，
07:12
And by the time we get around here,
143
420000
2000
直到这里，
07:14
we get ten or fewer photos, and then there's this long, flat tail.
144
422000
4000
摄影者们只提供了10张或更少的照片，然后，我们看到的便是个长长的，平坦的尾部线条。
07:18
And by the time you get to the middle,
145
426000
2000
当看到这个尾部线条中部时，
07:20
you've got hundreds of people
146
428000
2000
你会发现有数百个
07:22
who have contributed only one photo each.
147
430000
3000
仅仅提供了一张照片的摄影者。
07:25
This is called a power-law distribution.
148
433000
2000
这叫做幂律分布。
07:27
It appears often in unconstrained social systems
149
435000
5000
幂律分布在没有限制的社会系统中是很常见的。
07:32
where people are allowed to contribute as much or as little as they like --
150
440000
4000
就是说当一种系统对人们贡献的多少没有任何限制时，
07:36
this is often what you get. Right?
151
444000
2000
你往往会得到这样的结果。
07:38
The math behind the power-law distribution is that whatever's in the nth position
152
446000
4000
幂律分布的数学原理是，相对于第一个位置上的个体而言，
07:42
is doing about one-nth of whatever's being measured,
153
450000
3000
在第n个位置的个体，
07:45
relative to the person in the first position.
154
453000
2000
贡献了1/n的力量。
07:47
So, we'd expect the tenth most prolific photographer
155
455000
2000
因此，我们会期待第十个贡献最多的摄影者
07:49
to have contributed about a tenth of the photos,
156
457000
3000
提供10%的照片，
07:52
and the hundredth most prolific photographer
157
460000
2000
同样的，相对于第一个贡献最多的摄影者而言，
07:54
to have contributed only about a hundred as many photos
158
462000
3000
我们期待第100个摄影者
07:57
as the most prolific photographer did.
159
465000
2000
提供1%的照片。
07:59
So, the head of the curve can be sharper or flatter.
160
467000
4000
所以曲线的顶端可以更锐或更平，
08:03
But that basic math accounts both for the steep slope
161
471000
2000
但是，基础数学对这个陡斜率
08:05
and for the long, flat tail.
162
473000
2000
和长而平的尾部曲线都有所囊括。
08:07
And curiously, in these systems, as they grow larger,
163
475000
3000
令人感兴趣的是，在这种系统中，随着规模的加大，
08:10
the systems don't converge; they diverge more.
164
478000
4000
它并不会收敛，反而会更发散。
08:14
In bigger systems, the head gets bigger
165
482000
1000
在更大规模的此类系统中，顶端会变的更大，
08:15
and the tail gets longer, so the imbalance increases.
166
483000
6000
而尾部会变的更长，于是更加剧了整体的不平衡。
08:21
You can see the curve is obviously heavily left-weighted. Here's how heavily:
167
489000
4000
你可以看这条曲线的重心严重左倾，让我们看看有多严重。
08:25
if you take the top 10 percent of photographers contributing to this system,
168
493000
4000
如果我们取前10%的摄影者贡献的作品，
08:29
they account for three quarters of the photos taken --
169
497000
4000
他们占据了照片总数的75% －－
08:33
just the top 10 percent most prolific photographers.
170
501000
3000
注意，这仅仅是前10%的摄影者而已。
08:36
If you go down to five percent,
171
504000
2000
如果我们将数字减少到前5%的摄影者，
08:38
you're still accounting for 60 percent of the photos.
172
506000
3000
依然可以得到60%的照片。
08:41
If you go down to one percent, exclude 99 percent of the group effort,
173
509000
6000
如果排除掉99%，而只取前1%的摄影者，
08:47
you're still accounting for almost a quarter of the photos.
174
515000
3000
我们依然可以得到几乎25%的照片，
08:50
And because of this left weighting,
175
518000
2000
因为这个曲线的重心左倾，
08:52
the average is actually here, way to the left.
176
520000
5000
所以平均值实际上是在这里，非常靠近左端。
08:57
And that sounds strange to our ears,
177
525000
2000
即使这听起来很奇怪，
08:59
but what ends up happening is that 80 percent of the contributors
178
527000
3000
但是到头来我们得到的结果是，80%的摄影者
09:02
have contributed a below-average amount.
179
530000
3000
只提供了少于平均值数量的照片。
09:05
That sounds strange because we expect average and middle
180
533000
2000
这听起来怪是因为我们的预期是平均值与曲线中部的数值相等，
09:07
to be about the same, but they're not at all.
181
535000
3000
但是它们却是截然不同的。
09:10
This is the math underlying the 80/20 rule. Right?
182
538000
4000
这就是80/20法则背后的数学逻辑。
09:14
Whenever you hear anybody talking about the 80/20 rule,
183
542000
2000
不管什么时候你听到有人谈到80/20法则，
09:16
this is what's going on. Right?
184
544000
2000
就是在谈论这个情形 --
09:18
20 percent of the merchandise accounts for 80 percent of the revenue,
185
546000
4000
20%的商品带来80%的收益，
09:22
20 percent of the users use 80 percent of the resources --
186
550000
2000
20%的用户占用了80%的资源。
09:24
this is the shape people are talking about when that happens.
187
552000
5000
这就是当这些情况发生时大家所谈论的曲线。
09:29
Institutions only have two tools: carrots and sticks.
188
557000
3000
机构只有两种工具 －－胡萝卜和棍子（奖励和惩罚）。
09:32
And the 80 percent zone is a no-carrot and no-stick zone.
189
560000
4000
80%的区域是没有胡萝卜也没有棍子的区域。
09:36
The costs of running the institution mean that you cannot
190
564000
9000
所以，若采用机构的模式，机构的运作成本就决定了
09:45
take on the work of those people easily in an institutional frame.
191
573000
3000
想要拥有这一部分人的贡献是不可能的。
09:48
The institutional model always pushes leftwards,
192
576000
4000
采用机构的模式正如这条曲线重心左倾一样，
09:52
treating these people as employees.
193
580000
2000
只把左边这部分人当作员工对待。
09:54
The institutional response is,
194
582000
1000
采用机构模式的人们对此的回应是，
09:55
I can get 75 percent of the value for 10 percent of the hires -- great,
195
583000
5000
我可以利用10%的雇员实现75%的价值，太好了。
10:00
that's what I'll do.
196
588000
2000
我这么作就可以。
10:02
The cooperative infrastructure model says,
197
590000
2000
合作性基础建设模式的回应则是：
10:04
why do you want to give up a quarter of the value?
198
592000
3000
你为什么要放弃25%的价值呢？
10:07
If your system is designed
199
595000
2000
如果在设计系统的时候
10:09
so that you have to give up a quarter of the value,
200
597000
3000
就决定了你要放弃25%的价值，
10:12
re-engineer the system.
201
600000
3000
那么就进行系统改造吧！
10:15
Don't take on the cost that prevents you
202
603000
2000
别让高成本来成为
10:17
from getting to the contributions of these people.
203
605000
2000
阻止这一部分人贡献力量的拦路虎
10:19
Build the system so that anybody can contribute at any amount.
204
607000
5000
建立一个系统，让任何人都可以随意贡献，无论多少。
10:24
So the coordination response asks not,
205
612000
6000
所以合作性基础建设的方式回应道，我们并不是
10:30
how are these people as employees, but rather,
206
618000
3000
要了解这些人是什么样的雇员，我们只要知道
10:33
what is their contribution like? Right?
207
621000
2000
他们所能贡献的是什么。
10:35
We have over here Psycho Milt, a Flickr user,
208
623000
3000
在这里，有个Flickr的用户叫做Psycho Milt，
10:38
who has contributed one, and only one, photo titled "Iraq."
209
626000
5000
他上传了一张，且仅上传了这一张标注有“伊拉克”的图片，
10:43
And here's the photo. Right. Labeled, "Bad Day at Work."
210
631000
4000
照片在这里，命名为：“糟糕的工作日”。
10:47
Right? So the question is,
211
635000
3000
所以，问题就在于：
10:50
do you want that photo? Yes or no.
212
638000
3000
你到底要不要这张这张照片？要还是不要？
10:53
The question is not, is Psycho Milt a good employee?
213
641000
4000
问题的关键不在于Psycho Milt是不是个好员工，
10:57
And the tension here is between institution as enabler
214
645000
5000
这里的矛盾存在于，到底机构是个促成者
11:02
and institution as obstacle.
215
650000
2000
还是个阻碍者。
11:04
When you're dealing with the left-hand edge
216
652000
2000
当我们处理
11:06
of one of these distributions,
217
654000
2000
此类函数左侧的数据时，
11:08
when you're dealing with the people who spend a lot of time
218
656000
2000
当我们涉及这些花费大量时间
11:10
producing a lot of the material you want,
219
658000
2000
为制造你需要的材料的人们时，
11:12
that's an institution-as-enabler world.
220
660000
2000
机构便是促成者。
11:14
You can hire those people as employees, you can coordinate their work
221
662000
3000
你可以雇用这些人作为员工，协调他们的工作，
11:17
and you can get some output.
222
665000
2000
并得到一些产出。
11:19
But when you're down here, where the Psycho Milts of the world
223
667000
2000
但是，当你面临像Pshycho Milts这样
11:21
are adding one photo at a time,
224
669000
3000
一次只传一张照片的情况时，
11:24
that's institution as obstacle.
225
672000
3000
机构就成了阻碍者。
11:27
Institutions hate being told they're obstacles.
226
675000
4000
机构讨厌被别人成为阻碍者。
11:31
One of the first things that happens
227
679000
2000
当我们将一个问题机构化的时候，
11:33
when you institutionalize a problem
228
681000
2000
首先发生的事情之一是
11:35
is that the first goal of the institution
229
683000
4000
这个机构的第一目标
11:39
immediately shifts from whatever the nominal goal was
230
687000
2000
会立即从原本被确立的目标变为
11:41
to self-preservation.
231
689000
2000
自我维护。
11:43
And the actual goal of the institution goes to two through n.
232
691000
4000
而机构真正的第一目标会变成第二甚至排到更后面去。
11:47
Right? So, when institutions are told they are obstacles,
233
695000
3000
当机构被告知他们是阻碍者，
11:50
and that there are other ways of coordinating the value,
234
698000
2000
并且告诉他们有其他的办法来协调价值时，
11:52
they go through something a little bit like the Kubler-Ross stages --
235
700000
5000
他们就会经历一些有点类似Kubler-Ross理论中的那几个阶段，
11:57
(Laughter)
236
705000
1000
（笑声）
11:58
-- of reaction, being told you have a fatal illness:
237
706000
2000
当你被告知身患绝症的时候的的反应是，
12:00
denial, anger, bargaining, acceptance.
238
708000
4000
否认，愤怒，讨价还价，接受。
12:04
Most of the cooperative systems we've seen
239
712000
2000
我们所知的合作系统，大部分
12:06
haven't been around long enough
240
714000
1000
还没有足够的时间
12:07
to have gotten to the acceptance phase.
241
715000
3000
达到最后这个接受的阶段。
12:10
Many, many institutions are still in denial,
242
718000
2000
很多很多机构还沉浸在否认的阶段，
12:12
but we're seeing recently a lot of both anger and bargaining.
243
720000
5000
但是最近，达到愤怒和讨价还价阶段的也有很多。
12:17
There's a wonderful, small example going on right now.
244
725000
2000
目前，有一个特别能说明问题的小例子。
12:19
In France, a bus company is suing people for forming a carpool,
245
727000
5000
在法国，一个汽车公司控诉一些“拼车”的人，
12:24
right, because the fact that they have coordinated
246
732000
3000
因为通过这些人彼此之间的协作
12:27
themselves to create cooperative value is depriving them of revenue.
247
735000
6000
所创造的价值，导致了他们的收入下降。
12:33
You can follow this in the Guardian.
248
741000
1000
你可以在《卫报》上跟踪这条新闻，
12:34
It's actually quite entertaining.
249
742000
4000
还是很有娱乐效果的。
12:38
The bigger question is,
250
746000
2000
更重要的问题是，
12:40
what do you do about the value down here?
251
748000
3000
对于这些人创造出来的价值，你要怎么做？
12:43
Right? How do you capture that?
252
751000
3000
你要怎么才能取得那部分价值？
12:46
And institutions, as I've said, are prevented from capturing that.
253
754000
4000
就像我说的，机构本身就在阻止这些价值。
12:50
Steve Ballmer, now CEO of Microsoft,
254
758000
2000
微软（Microsoft）的首席执行官Steve Ballmer
12:52
was criticizing Linux a couple of years ago, and he said,
255
760000
2000
在几年前曾经批评Linux，他说：
12:54
"Oh, this business of thousands of programmers
256
762000
2000
有几千个编程人员
12:56
contributing to Linux, this is a myth.
257
764000
2000
对Linux作出了贡献，这简直是个神话。
12:58
We've looked at who's contributed to Linux,
258
766000
3000
我们检视过都为Linux贡献力量的人，
13:01
and most of the patches have been produced by programmers
259
769000
3000
大部分修补程序都是由
13:04
who've only done one thing." Right?
260
772000
4000
只为Linux编辑了一个程序的设计师提供的。
13:08
You can hear this distribution under that complaint.
261
776000
4000
你可以从他的抱怨中听到这个函数图形
13:12
And you can see why, from Ballmer's point of view,
262
780000
2000
你还可以从Ballmer的角度出发而明白这为什么
13:14
that's a bad idea, right?
263
782000
1000
Linux的办法是不可取的。
13:15
We hired this programmer, he came in, he drank our Cokes
264
783000
3000
我们雇用了这个编程师，他来到公司，喝了我们的可乐，
13:18
and played Foosball for three years and he had one idea.
265
786000
2000
玩了三年桌上足球，然后他只设计出一个修补程序。
13:20
(Laughter)
266
788000
1000
（笑声）
13:21
Right? Bad hire. Right?
267
789000
3000
雇错人啦。
13:24
(Laughter)
268
792000
2000
（笑声）
13:26
The Psycho Milt question is, was it a good idea?
269
794000
5000
像Psycho Milt这样的问题是，这到底是不是个可取的办法呢？
13:31
What if it was a security patch?
270
799000
2000
如果这个程序员设计出来的是个维护系统安全的修补程序呢？
13:33
What if it was a security patch for a buffer overflow exploit,
271
801000
4000
如果是个缓存溢出错误的修补程序呢？
13:37
of which Windows has not some, [but] several?
272
805000
2000
Windows在这方面的漏洞还不少呢。
13:39
Do you want that patch, right?
273
807000
4000
问题是你到底要不要这个修补程序？
13:43
The fact that a single programmer can,
274
811000
2000
一个程序员可以
13:45
without having to move into a professional relation
275
813000
3000
不必正式被一个机构雇用，
13:48
to an institution, improve Linux once
276
816000
3000
而是仅仅编辑出一个修补程序来改善Linux
13:51
and never be seen from again, should terrify Ballmer.
277
819000
4000
之后便消失不见，这个事实应该吓到Ballmer。
13:55
Because this kind of value is unreachable in classic
278
823000
4000
因为这种价值在传统的组织形式中是
13:59
institutional frameworks, but is part of cooperative
279
827000
2000
遥不可及的。但这种价值却是合作式系统的一部分，
14:01
systems of open-source software, of file sharing,
280
829000
3000
例如于开放源代码软件、计算机文件分享，
14:04
of the Wikipedia. I've used a lot of examples from Flickr,
281
832000
3000
及维基百科（Wikipedia）等。我已经举了很多个Flickr上的例子，
14:07
but there are actually stories about this from all over.
282
835000
3000
但是实际上这种例子遍地都是。
14:10
Meetup, a service founded so that users could find people
283
838000
3000
Meetup是个为了方面人们在自己的区域寻找到
14:13
in their local area who share their interests and affinities
284
841000
2000
志趣相投的人。
14:15
and actually have a real-world meeting offline in a cafe
285
843000
4000
他们在生活中还有聚会呢，比如在咖啡馆
14:19
or a pub or what have you.
286
847000
2000
或者酒吧等等。
14:21
When Scott Heiferman founded Meetup,
287
849000
2000
当Scott Heiferman建立Meetup的时候，
14:23
he thought it would be used for, you know,
288
851000
2000
他认为使用群体应该是，
14:25
train spotters and cat fanciers -- classic affinity groups.
289
853000
2000
喜欢"猜火车"的人和爱猫的人群 －－典型的有共同兴趣的分享团体。
14:27
The inventors don't know what the invention is.
290
855000
3000
创造者并不知道创造产物是什么。
14:30
Number one group on Meetup right now,
291
858000
2000
Meetup上第一名的团体，
14:32
most chapters in most cities with most members, most active?
292
860000
3000
地方分会最多，会员最多，最活跃的团体，
14:35
Stay-at-home moms. Right?
293
863000
2000
是家庭主妇们。
14:37
In the suburbanized, dual-income United States,
294
865000
3000
在市郊化，双薪收入的美国，
14:40
stay-at-home moms are actually missing
295
868000
3000
家庭主妇们并没有享有
14:43
the social infrastructure that comes from extended family
296
871000
3000
来自大家庭
14:46
and local, small-scale neighborhoods.
297
874000
3000
和紧邻的社会基础设施，
14:49
So they're reinventing it, using these tools.
298
877000
3000
所以她们利用这些手段来重新创造这种价值。
14:52
Meetup is the platform,
299
880000
1000
Meetup只是个平台，
14:53
but the value here is in social infrastructure.
300
881000
3000
在这种情况下传递的价值却存在于社会基础建设中。
14:56
If you want to know what technology is going to change the world,
301
884000
3000
如果你想知道什么样的科技可以改变世界，
14:59
don't pay attention to 13-year-old boys --
302
887000
2000
别去关注13岁的男孩子们，
15:01
pay attention to young mothers,
303
889000
2000
把注意力集中在年轻的妈妈们身上，
15:03
because they have got not an ounce of support for technology
304
891000
3000
因为，每一点科技支持
15:06
that doesn't materially make their lives better.
305
894000
3000
都使他们的生活变的更好。
15:09
This is so much more important than Xbox,
306
897000
2000
这比Xbox重要太多了，
15:11
but it's a lot less glitzy.
307
899000
2000
只是没有那么抢眼罢了。
15:13
I think this is a revolution.
308
901000
2000
我认为这将会是一个重大变革。
15:15
I think that this is a really profound change
309
903000
3000
我认为，从人类行为安排的角度讲，
15:18
in the way human affairs are arranged.
310
906000
1000
这将是一个意义重大的改变。
15:19
And I use that word advisedly.
311
907000
2000
我非常谨慎的使用这个词。
15:21
It's a revolution in that it's a change in equilibrium.
312
909000
3000
它是一场改变平衡关系的革命。
15:24
It's a whole new way of doing things, which includes new downsides.
313
912000
6000
这是一种全新的做事方式，同时也包括新的不利因素。
15:30
In the United States right now, a woman named Judith Miller
314
918000
3000
在美国有一位Judith Miller女士，
15:33
is in jail for not having given to a Federal Grand Jury her sources --
315
921000
5000
因为拒绝为联邦大陪审团提供她的资源而被囚禁起来，
15:38
she's a reporter for the New York Times --
316
926000
1000
她是纽约时报的记者，
15:39
her sources, in a very abstract and hard-to-follow case.
317
927000
3000
并且她所持有的资源是个非常抽象和难以追踪的案件。
15:42
And journalists are in the street rallying to improve the shield laws.
318
930000
3000
新闻记者们结合起来当街抗议，希望改进庇护法。
15:45
The shield laws are our laws -- pretty much a patchwork of state laws --
319
933000
4000
庇护法基本是一种我们国家法律的修补法案，
15:49
that prevent a journalist from having to betray a source.
320
937000
3000
可以防止新闻记者们被强制泄露新闻资源。
15:52
This is happening, however, against the background
321
940000
3000
但是，这件事的发生
15:55
of the rise of Web logging.
322
943000
2000
与兴起的网络日志（博客）的背景相违背。
15:57
Web logging is a classic example of mass amateurization.
323
945000
4000
网络日志是一个大规模业余化的经典例子，
16:01
It has de-professionalized publishing.
324
949000
2000
是非专业化的发表方式。
16:03
Want to publish globally anything you think today?
325
951000
3000
想把自己任何的想法公布于世界？
16:06
It is a one-button operation that you can do for free.
326
954000
4000
你只需按一个键就可以轻松做到，而且还是免费的。
16:10
That has sent the professional class of publishing down
327
958000
4000
这就使得专业级出版/发表地位下滑
16:14
into the ranks of mass amateurization.
328
962000
3000
至大规模业余化的等级中。
16:17
And so the shield law, as much as we want it --
329
965000
4000
所以关于庇护法，无论我们有多么想要
16:21
we want a professional class of truth-tellers --
330
969000
2000
专业级的新闻记者，
16:23
it is becoming increasingly incoherent, because
331
971000
3000
它也变得越来越不具备一致性了，因为
16:26
the institution is becoming incoherent.
332
974000
2000
机构本身就逐渐变得前后矛盾。
16:28
There are people in the States right now
333
976000
2000
现在在美国，有一些人
16:30
tying themselves into knots, trying to figure out
334
978000
3000
费劲全力要搞清楚
16:33
whether or not bloggers are journalists.
335
981000
2000
发表博文的人到底是不是新闻记者。
16:35
And the answer to that question is,
336
983000
2000
对于这个问题的答案是：
16:37
it doesn't matter, because that's not the right question.
337
985000
3000
这根本不重要，因为这个问题本身就不对。
16:40
Journalism was an answer to an even more important question,
338
988000
4000
新闻本身是一个更重要的问题的答案，
16:44
which is, how will society be informed?
339
992000
2000
那就是，信息要如何传递给社会？
16:46
How will they share ideas and opinions?
340
994000
3000
人们如何分享想法和意见？
16:49
And if there is an answer to that that happens outside
341
997000
3000
如果我们在新闻的专业机制之外
16:52
the professional framework of journalism,
342
1000000
2000
可以得到这个问题的答案，
16:54
it makes no sense to take a professional metaphor
343
1002000
4000
那么把这些
16:58
and apply it to this distributed class.
344
1006000
4000
分散的个体们扣上专业的帽子就完全没有意义。
17:02
So as much as we want the shield laws,
345
1010000
2000
所以，无论我们多么想要庇护法，
17:04
the background -- the institution to which they were attached --
346
1012000
4000
但是这个背景－－也就是他们所依附的机构本身，
17:08
is becoming incoherent.
347
1016000
2000
已经开始不和谐了。
17:10
Here's another example.
348
1018000
2000
这还有另外一个例子：
17:12
Pro-ana, the pro-ana groups.
349
1020000
2000
Pro-ana, 支持ana的团体。
17:14
These are groups of teenage girls
350
1022000
2000
有很多青少年团体，
17:16
who have taken on Web logs, bulletin boards,
351
1024000
3000
利用博客，公告板
17:19
other kinds of cooperative infrastructure,
352
1027000
2000
或其他种类的合作基础设施，
17:21
and have used it to set up support groups for
353
1029000
2000
建立了
17:23
remaining anorexic by choice.
354
1031000
2000
自愿支持厌食的团体。
17:25
They post pictures of thin models, which they call "thinspiration."
355
1033000
3000
他们发表超瘦模特的照片，称之为“瘦”启示/励瘦(Thinspiration)。
17:28
They have little slogans, like "Salvation through Starvation."
356
1036000
3000
他们有自己的口号标语，例如“饥饿是种救赎”,
17:31
They even have Lance Armstrong-style bracelets,
357
1039000
2000
甚至有Lance Armstrong式的手镯，
17:33
these red bracelets, which signify, in the small group,
358
1041000
3000
在这组女孩中，这些红色的手镯意味着，
17:36
I am trying to maintain my eating disorder.
359
1044000
3000
我要继续坚持厌食。
17:39
They trade tips, like, if you feel like eating something,
360
1047000
2000
他们互相交换技巧，比如，如果你想吃东西了，
17:41
clean a toilet or the litter box. The feeling will pass.
361
1049000
5000
就去清理厕所或垃圾箱，这样就吃的欲望就会消失。
17:46
We're used to support groups being beneficial.
362
1054000
3000
我们习惯于支持对我们有利的团体，
17:49
We have an attitude that support groups are inherently beneficial.
363
1057000
3000
我们有一种观念是，支持的团体总是有益的。
17:52
But it turns out that the logic of the support group is value neutral.
364
1060000
4000
但是到头来，对支持团体的合理解释是中性的。
17:56
A support group is simply a small group that wants to maintain
365
1064000
4000
支持团体就是一个在较大团体中
18:00
a way of living in the context of a larger group.
366
1068000
3000
想要保持自己生活方式的小团体。
18:03
Now, when the larger group is a bunch of drunks,
367
1071000
2000
当那个较大的团体是一群醉鬼时，
18:05
and the small group wants to stay sober, then we think,
368
1073000
2000
这个小团体却要保持清醒，那么我们认为，
18:07
that's a great support group.
369
1075000
2000
这是个非常好的支持团体。
18:09
But when the small group is teenage girls
370
1077000
2000
但是当这个小团体的成员
18:11
who want to stay anorexic by choice, then we're horrified.
371
1079000
4000
是一些想要保持厌食状态的十几岁的女孩们时，我们就吓坏了。
18:15
What's happened is that the normative goals
372
1083000
3000
这个中的原因是，我们已经习惯了的
18:18
of the support groups that we're used to,
373
1086000
2000
那些支持团体的目标准则
18:20
came from the institutions that were framing them,
374
1088000
3000
都是被机构订造好的，
18:23
and not from the infrastructure.
375
1091000
1000
而并不是来自于基础建设阶段。
18:24
Once the infrastructure becomes generically available,
376
1092000
4000
当人们可以轻松运用基础构架，
18:28
the logic of the support group has been revealed to be
377
1096000
2000
支持团体的概念显得
18:30
accessible to anyone, including people pursuing these kinds of goals.
378
1098000
5000
任何人都可以灵活运用，包括追求这种目标(支持厌食状态)的人们。
18:35
So, there are significant downsides to these changes
379
1103000
2000
所以我说，这种变化在有积极因素的同时，
18:37
as well as upsides. And of course, in the current environment,
380
1105000
3000
也存在着重大的负面因素。当然，在现今环境中，
18:40
one need allude only lightly to the work of non-state actors
381
1108000
5000
试图影响国际事务并利用这些，
18:45
trying to influence global affairs, and taking advantage of these.
382
1113000
3000
我们只需要稍微影射非国家行为体。
18:48
This is a social map of the hijackers and their associates
383
1116000
3000
这是个９１１事件的劫机者和他的同僚们
18:51
who perpetrated the 9/11 attack.
384
1119000
4000
的社交关系图。
18:55
It was produced by analyzing their communications patterns
385
1123000
4000
人们利用这些工具分析他们的通讯模式。
18:59
using a lot of these tools. And doubtless the intelligence communities of the world
386
1127000
3000
无可置疑地，对于上周的袭击，全球的情报部门
19:02
are doing the same work today for the attacks of last week.
387
1130000
4000
也在做同样的工作。
19:06
Now, this is the part of the talk where I tell you
388
1134000
2000
那么我现在该告诉你
19:08
what's going to come as a result of all of this,
389
1136000
2000
我前面所讲的那些造成的结果是什么了，
19:10
but I'm running out of time, which is good,
390
1138000
3000
但是我现在没时间了，这很好，
19:13
because I don't know.
391
1141000
2000
因为我也不知道。
19:15
(Laughter)
392
1143000
2000
（笑声）
19:17
Right. As with the printing press, if it's really a revolution,
393
1145000
4000
就像印刷一样，如果这真的是一个变革，
19:21
it doesn't take us from Point A to Point B.
394
1149000
2000
它并不是简单地把我们从A点带到B点，
19:23
It takes us from Point A to chaos.
395
1151000
3000
而是把我们从A点带到混乱。
19:26
The printing press precipitated 200 years of chaos,
396
1154000
5000
印刷曾经陷入一个200年的混乱阶段，
19:31
moving from a world where the Catholic Church
397
1159000
2000
从天主教堂
19:33
was the sort of organizing political force to the Treaty of Westphalia,
398
1161000
4000
管理政治势力到威斯特伐利亚和约，
19:37
when we finally knew what the new unit was: the nation state.
399
1165000
3000
直到我们最终知道所建立的新的国家体系是单一民族国家。
19:40
Now, I'm not predicting 200 years of chaos as a result of this. 50.
400
1168000
5000
这里我并没有由此预测200年的混乱局面，我说是50年吧。
19:45
50 years in which loosely coordinated groups
401
1173000
4000
50年内，松散的合作团体
19:49
are going to be given increasingly high leverage,
402
1177000
3000
的影响力将大大增加，
19:52
and the more those groups forego traditional institutional imperatives --
403
1180000
4000
机构有机构的规则，例如预先决策制度或确定利润动机是什么－－
19:56
like deciding in advance what's going to happen,
404
1184000
3000
这些团体超越机构的控制规则越多，
19:59
or the profit motive -- the more leverage they'll get.
405
1187000
3000
他们的影响力也就越大。
20:02
And institutions are going to come under
406
1190000
2000
而机构将会面临
20:04
an increasing degree of pressure,
407
1192000
2000
日益增加的压力，
20:06
and the more rigidly managed, and the more they rely
408
1194000
2000
管理越严密，对信息垄断依赖性越大，
20:08
on information monopolies, the greater the pressure is going to be.
409
1196000
4000
他们的压力就会越大。
20:12
And that's going to happen one arena at a time,
410
1200000
2000
这将会一个战场接一个战场，
20:14
one institution at a time. The forces are general,
411
1202000
3000
一个机构接一个机构地发生。影响力是笼统的，
20:17
but the results are going to be specific.
412
1205000
2000
结果将会是明确的。
20:19
And so the point here is not,
413
1207000
2000
所以这里的重点并不是
20:21
"This is wonderful," or "We're going to see a transition
414
1209000
3000
”这太好了“或者”我们将会看到一个从
20:24
from only institutions to only cooperative framework."
415
1212000
3000
单纯机构到单纯合作机制的变革“，
20:27
It's going to be much more complicated than that.
416
1215000
2000
而是比这个复杂多了。
20:29
But the point is that it's going to be a massive readjustment.
417
1217000
3000
但是问题是，我们将面临一个巨大的重整
20:32
And since we can see it in advance and know it's coming,
418
1220000
2000
既然我们已经预见到了这一点，
20:34
my argument is essentially: we might as well get good at it.
419
1222000
3000
那么我的论点便是我们要做好准备迎接它。
20:37
Thank you very much.
420
1225000
2000
谢谢。
20:39
(Applause)
421
1227000
2000
（鼓掌）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Clay Shirky - Social Media TheoristClay Shirky argues that the history of the modern world could be rendered as the history of ways of arguing, where changes in media change what sort of arguments are possible -- with deep social and political implications.
Why you should listen
Clay Shirky's work focuses on the rising usefulness of networks -- using decentralized technologies such as peer-to-peer sharing, wireless, software for social creation, and open-source development. New technologies are enabling new kinds of cooperative structures to flourish as a way of getting things done in business, science, the arts and elsewhere, as an alternative to centralized and institutional structures, which he sees as self-limiting. In his writings and speeches he has argued that "a group is its own worst enemy."
Shirky is an adjunct professor in New York Universityʼs graduate Interactive Telecommunications Program, where he teaches a course named “Social Weather.” Heʼs the author of several books. This spring at the TED headquarters in New York, he gave an impassioned talk against SOPA/PIPA that saw 1 million views in 48 hours.
Clay Shirky | Speaker | TED.com