TED2009
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita: A prediction for the future of Iran
布魯斯·布恩諾·德·梅斯奎塔預測伊朗局勢的未來
Filmed:
Readability: 4.1
1,045,301 views
布鲁斯·布恩·德·梅斯奎塔運用數學分析來預測一些人類突發事件，像戰爭，政權轉變，巴勒斯坦起義等等(經常他是對了)。經過一番對他預測方法簡潔的解釋後，梅斯奎塔對伊朗未來局勢提出三個预言。
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita - Political scientist
A consultant to the CIA and the Department of Defense, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita has built an intricate computer model that can predict the outcomes of international conflicts with bewildering accuracy. Full bio
A consultant to the CIA and the Department of Defense, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita has built an intricate computer model that can predict the outcomes of international conflicts with bewildering accuracy. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:18
What I'm going to try to do is explain to you
0
0
3000
我將向各位說明
00:21
quickly how to predict,
1
3000
2000
如何預測，
00:23
and illustrate it with some predictions
2
5000
2000
並用一些實例說明，
00:25
about what Iran is going to do in the next couple of years.
3
7000
5000
關於伊朗在未來一兩年將會怎麼做，
00:30
In order to predict effectively,
4
12000
3000
為了預測正確
00:33
we need to use science.
5
15000
3000
我們需要運用科學
00:36
And the reason that we need to use science
6
18000
3000
需要運用科學的原因，
00:39
is because then we can reproduce what we're doing;
7
21000
2000
是因為這樣才可以重複驗證我們做的，
00:41
it's not just wisdom or guesswork.
8
23000
3000
不只是靠智慧或是猜測。
00:44
And if we can predict,
9
26000
3000
如果我們可以預測，
00:47
then we can engineer the future.
10
29000
2000
那麼我們就可以掌握未來，
00:49
So if you are concerned to influence energy policy,
11
31000
4000
所以如果你想影響能源政策，
00:53
or you are concerned to influence national security policy,
12
35000
5000
或你想影響國家安全政策，
00:58
or health policy, or education,
13
40000
3000
或是健保，或教育，
01:01
science -- and a particular branch of science -- is a way to do it,
14
43000
4000
科學，與科學中特別的一支，是正確的方法，
01:05
not the way we've been doing it,
15
47000
2000
與我們從前的方法不同，
01:07
which is seat-of-the-pants wisdom.
16
49000
2000
從前用的是憑感覺經驗這種智慧，
01:09
Now before I get into how to do it
17
51000
2000
現在，在我說明如何做它之前，
01:11
let me give you a little truth in advertising,
18
53000
3000
先告訴你們一些事實，
01:14
because I'm not engaged in the business of magic.
19
56000
3000
因為我做的不是魔術，
01:17
There are lots of thing that the approach I take can predict,
20
59000
4000
我用的方法可以預測許多事情，
01:21
and there are some that it can't.
21
63000
2000
但有些事沒有辦法，
01:23
It can predict complex negotiations
22
65000
3000
它可以預測複雜的談判，
01:26
or situations involving coercion --
23
68000
3000
或有用到威脅手段的情形，
01:29
that is in essence everything that has to do with politics,
24
71000
4000
幾乎可以應用於任何與政治有關的事情，
01:33
much of what has to do with business,
25
75000
2000
也可以用在多數與商業有關的事上，
01:35
but sorry, if you're looking to speculate in the stock market,
26
77000
6000
但很抱歉，如果你想在股票市場投機，
01:41
I don't predict stock markets -- OK,
27
83000
2000
我不預測股票市場--嗯，
01:43
it's not going up any time really soon.
28
85000
3000
它不會在短期內上漲，
01:46
But I'm not engaged in doing that.
29
88000
3000
我不從事這種預測，
01:49
I'm not engaged in predicting random number generators.
30
91000
3000
我不預測會出現什麼隨機數目，
01:52
I actually get phone calls from people
31
94000
2000
真的有人打電話問我，
01:54
who want to know what lottery numbers are going to win.
32
96000
3000
想知道什麼樂透數字會中獎？
01:57
I don't have a clue.
33
99000
3000
我毫無線索，
02:00
I engage in the use of game theory, game theory is a branch of mathematics
34
102000
4000
我採用的是博弈理論，它是數學的一支，
02:04
and that means, sorry, that even in the study of politics,
35
106000
4000
就是說，就是在政治研究當中，
02:08
math has come into the picture.
36
110000
3000
數學也來軋一腳，
02:11
We can no longer pretend that we just speculate about politics,
37
113000
4000
我們對政治不能再只靠猜測，
02:15
we need to look at this in a rigorous way.
38
117000
3000
我們該用嚴肅的方法看待它，
02:18
Now, what is game theory about?
39
120000
3000
那麼什麼是博弈理論？
02:21
It assumes that people are looking out for what's good for them.
40
123000
5000
它假設人是追尋他們的利益，
02:26
That doesn't seem terribly shocking --
41
128000
2000
這看來並不很離譜--
02:28
although it's controversial for a lot of people --
42
130000
2000
雖然對不少人這是有得爭議的--
02:30
that we are self-interested.
43
132000
4000
就是我們是追求自利的，
02:34
In order to look out for what's best for them
44
136000
2000
為了追求他們最大的利益，
02:36
or what they think is best for them,
45
138000
2000
或者他們認為什麼是對他們最好的，
02:38
people have values -- they identify what they want, and what they don't want.
46
140000
4000
人們有價值觀--他們認清自己想要的是什麼，不想要的是什麼，
02:42
And they have beliefs about what other people want,
47
144000
3000
也相信別人想要的是什麼，
02:45
and what other people don't want, how much power other people have,
48
147000
3000
還有別人不想要什麼，他們有多大的權力，
02:48
how much those people could get in the way of whatever it is that you want.
49
150000
4000
還有你算計的他們最多可以得到多少
02:52
And they face limitations, constraints,
50
154000
4000
以及他們面對的限制，
02:56
they may be weak, they may be located in the wrong part of the world,
51
158000
3000
他們可能柔弱，可能處於這世界不對的地方，
02:59
they may be Einstein, stuck away farming
52
161000
3000
他們也可能像愛因斯坦那樣有本事，但困在農村，
03:02
someplace in a rural village in India not being noticed,
53
164000
4000
住在印度一個鄉下，沒人注意到，
03:06
as was the case for Ramanujan for a long time,
54
168000
3000
就像Ramanujan那樣很長一段時間，
03:09
a great mathematician but nobody noticed.
55
171000
3000
一位了不起的數學家，但沒人注意到，
03:12
Now who is rational?
56
174000
2000
那麼誰是理性的呢？
03:14
A lot of people are worried about what is rationality about?
57
176000
3000
許多人擔心理性是什麼？
03:17
You know, what if people are rational?
58
179000
2000
人們都是理性的，
03:19
Mother Theresa, she was rational.
59
181000
3000
德瑞沙修女，她是理性的，
03:22
Terrorists, they're rational.
60
184000
4000
恐怖分子，他們也是理性的，
03:26
Pretty much everybody is rational.
61
188000
3000
一般來說每個人都是理性的，
03:29
I think there are only two exceptions that I'm aware of --
62
191000
3000
我所知的例外只有兩種情形--
03:32
two-year-olds, they are not rational,
63
194000
2000
兩歲的小孩，他們不是理性的，
03:34
they have very fickle preferences,
64
196000
3000
他們想要的變來變去，
03:37
they switch what they think all the time,
65
199000
2000
他們的想法不時的改變，
03:39
and schizophrenics are probably not rational,
66
201000
3000
還有精神分裂病患者大概也不理性，
03:42
but pretty much everybody else is rational.
67
204000
2000
但其他多數人都是理性的，
03:44
That is, they are just trying to do
68
206000
2000
就是說，他們只想做
03:46
what they think is in their own best interest.
69
208000
5000
他們認為對他們最有利的事。
03:51
Now in order to work out what people are going to do
70
213000
2000
為了推算出人們下一步會怎麼做
03:53
to pursue their interests,
71
215000
2000
以追求他們的利益，
03:55
we have to think about who has influence in the world.
72
217000
2000
我們必須考慮這世界上誰有影響力，
03:57
If you're trying to influence corporations to change their behavior,
73
219000
5000
如果你想影響公司改變它們的行為，
04:02
with regard to producing pollutants,
74
224000
3000
關於產生污染的問題，
04:05
one approach, the common approach,
75
227000
2000
一個做法，較通常的做法，
04:07
is to exhort them to be better,
76
229000
2000
是勸告他們改善，
04:09
to explain to them what damage they're doing to the planet.
77
231000
3000
讓他們知道他們 對地球造成怎樣的傷害，，
04:12
And many of you may have noticed that doesn't have
78
234000
2000
你們可能知道這效果有限，
04:14
as big an effect, as perhaps you would like it to have.
79
236000
4000
不如你們期望的那麼有用，
04:18
But if you show them that it's in their interest,
80
240000
3000
但如果你能顯示這樣對他們有利，
04:21
then they're responsive.
81
243000
2000
他們就會有反應。
04:23
So, we have to work out who influences problems.
82
245000
3000
所以，我們必須找出誰有影響力，
04:26
If we're looking at Iran, the president of the United States
83
248000
2000
例如看伊朗問題，美國總統
04:28
we would like to think, may have some influence --
84
250000
3000
我們認為，可能有些影響力--
04:31
certainly the president in Iran has some influence --
85
253000
4000
自然，伊朗總統有些影響力--
04:35
but we make a mistake if we just pay attention
86
257000
3000
但我們可能犯錯，如果只注意
04:38
to the person at the top of the power ladder
87
260000
3000
在權力階梯頂端的人，
04:41
because that person doesn't know much about Iran,
88
263000
3000
因為那個人對伊朗所知不多，
04:44
or about energy policy,
89
266000
2000
或關於能源政策，
04:46
or about health care,
90
268000
2000
或關於健康保險，
04:48
or about any particular policy.
91
270000
2000
或任何特定的政策，
04:50
That person surrounds himself or herself with advisers.
92
272000
5000
決策者周圍有許多顧問。
04:55
If we're talking about national security problems,
93
277000
2000
如果我們談的是國家安全問題，
04:57
maybe it's the Secretary of State,
94
279000
2000
那麼可能 是國務卿
04:59
maybe it's the Secretary of Defense,
95
281000
2000
也許是國防部長，
05:01
the Director of National Intelligence,
96
283000
2000
或情報局長，
05:03
maybe the ambassador to the United Nations, or somebody else
97
285000
2000
或駐聯合國大使，或其他的
05:05
who they think is going to know more about the particular problem.
98
287000
4000
他們認為對某個問題知道較多的人，
05:09
But let's face it, the Secretary of State doesn't know much about Iran.
99
291000
3000
讓我們想想看，國務卿對伊朗所知不多，
05:12
The secretary of defense doesn't know much about Iran.
100
294000
3000
國防部長也不是伊朗問題專家。
05:15
Each of those people in turn
101
297000
3000
他們每個人
05:18
has advisers who advise them,
102
300000
2000
都各有自己的顧問，
05:20
so they can advise the president.
103
302000
3000
因此他們可以對總統提意見。
05:23
There are lots of people shaping decisions
104
305000
3000
這是許多人共同影響決策的，
05:26
and so if we want to predict correctly
105
308000
2000
所以如果我們想正確的預測，
05:28
we have to pay attention to everybody
106
310000
3000
就需注意到每一個人，
05:31
who is trying to shape the outcome,
107
313000
2000
每個對結果有影響的人，
05:33
not just the people at the pinnacle
108
315000
3000
而不是只在尖端的人，
05:36
of the decision-making pyramid.
109
318000
4000
決策金字塔的，
05:40
Unfortunately, a lot of times we don't do that.
110
322000
2000
不幸的是，常常我們不是這樣做。
05:42
There's a good reason that we don't do that,
111
324000
2000
不這樣做是有原因的，
05:44
and there's a good reason that using game theory and computers,
112
326000
3000
使用博弈理論與電腦是有很好的理由，
05:47
we can overcome the limitation
113
329000
3000
我們可以超越限制，
05:50
of just looking at a few people.
114
332000
2000
不是只看少數幾個人。
05:52
Imagine a problem with just five decision-makers.
115
334000
4000
假設一個問題只涉及五名決策人士，
05:56
Imagine for example
116
338000
2000
想像一下，
05:58
that Sally over here,
117
340000
2000
這裡是Sally，
06:00
wants to know what Harry, and Jane,
118
342000
3000
她想知道Harry，Jane
06:03
and George and Frank are thinking,
119
345000
3000
George,Frank怎麼想，
06:06
and sends messages to those people.
120
348000
2000
並把意見傳達給他們，
06:08
Sally's giving her opinion to them,
121
350000
2000
Sally把她的看法傳給他們，
06:10
and they're giving their opinion to Sally.
122
352000
3000
他們也把自己的意見傳給Sally。
06:13
But Sally also wants to know
123
355000
2000
但Sally也想知道
06:15
what Harry is saying to these three,
124
357000
3000
Harry對其他三人說了什麼，
06:18
and what they're saying to Harry.
125
360000
2000
以及他們對Harry說了什麼，
06:20
And Harry wants to know
126
362000
2000
而Harry又想知道
06:22
what each of those people are saying to each other, and so on,
127
364000
3000
其他每個人間互相說了什麼，
06:25
and Sally would like to know what Harry thinks those people are saying.
128
367000
3000
Sally想知道Harry對其他人說法的感覺如何。
06:28
That's a complicated problem; that's a lot to know.
129
370000
3000
這是個複雜的問題，需要知道的很多。
06:31
With five decision-makers
130
373000
3000
當有五名決策人士時
06:34
there are a lot of linkages --
131
376000
2000
就有許多的關係聯繫--
06:36
120, as a matter of fact,
132
378000
2000
實際上是120條連線，
06:38
if you remember your factorials.
133
380000
2000
如果你記得代數裡的階乘關係，
06:40
Five factorial is 120.
134
382000
2000
5的階乘是120，
06:42
Now you may be surprised to know
135
384000
2000
現在你可能驚異的發現
06:44
that smart people can keep 120 things straight
136
386000
3000
聰明人可以清楚記得120件事
06:47
in their head.
137
389000
2000
在他們的腦中，
06:49
Suppose we double the number of influencers
138
391000
2000
假如我們把有影響的人數加倍，
06:51
from five to 10.
139
393000
2000
從5變成10，
06:53
Does that mean we've doubled the number of pieces of information
140
395000
4000
是資訊的數目也加倍嗎？
06:57
we need to know, from 120 to 240?
141
399000
2000
我們需要知道的，從120 變成240嗎 ？
06:59
No. How about 10 times?
142
401000
2000
不是，那是10倍嗎？
07:01
To 1,200? No.
143
403000
3000
成為1200？不是，
07:04
We've increased it to 3.6 million.
144
406000
3000
我們需要增加到360萬，
07:07
Nobody can keep that straight in their head.
145
409000
2000
沒有人的腦袋可以記得這麼多，
07:09
But computers,
146
411000
3000
但是電腦，
07:12
they can. They don't need coffee breaks,
147
414000
3000
它們可以，他們不需要休息喝咖啡，
07:15
they don't need vacations,
148
417000
3000
它們不需要休假，
07:18
they don't need to go to sleep at night,
149
420000
2000
它們不需要在晚上睡覺，
07:20
they don't ask for raises either.
150
422000
3000
它們也不要求加薪，
07:23
They can keep this information straight
151
425000
2000
它們能夠保持資訊正確，
07:25
and that means that we can process the information.
152
427000
3000
這表示我們可以處理這些資訊，
07:28
So I'm going to talk to you about how to process it,
153
430000
2000
我將談談如何處理它，
07:30
and I'm going to give you some examples out of Iran,
154
432000
3000
我將以伊朗為例，
07:33
and you're going to be wondering,
155
435000
2000
你們也許會奇怪，
07:35
"Why should we listen to this guy?
156
437000
2000
“為什麼要聽這個人的？
07:37
Why should we believe what he's saying?"
157
439000
3000
我們為什麼要相信他所說的？”
07:40
So I'm going to show you a factoid.
158
442000
4000
我給你們看這證詞，
07:44
This is an assessment by the Central Intelligence Agency
159
446000
3000
這是一個中央情報局的評估報告，
07:47
of the percentage of time
160
449000
2000
是正確的百分比
07:49
that the model I'm talking about
161
451000
2000
我將談的這個模型
07:51
is right in predicting things whose outcome is not yet known,
162
453000
3000
在預測還未發生的事情時，
07:54
when the experts who provided the data inputs
163
456000
4000
在提供數據的專家
07:58
got it wrong.
164
460000
2000
預測錯誤時，
08:00
That's not my claim, that's a CIA claim -- you can read it,
165
462000
3000
這不是我說的，是中情局說的--你們可以讀它，
08:03
it was declassified a while ago. You can read it in a volume edited by
166
465000
3000
不久前它才解密，你們可以在
08:06
H. Bradford Westerfield, Yale University Press.
167
468000
3000
威斯特菲編輯，耶魯大學出版這書上看到，
08:09
So, what do we need to know
168
471000
2000
我們需要知道什麼，
08:11
in order to predict?
169
473000
2000
才可以預測？
08:13
You may be surprised to find out we don't need to know very much.
170
475000
3000
你也許會因發現我們不需要知道很多而嚇一跳，
08:16
We do need to know who has a stake
171
478000
3000
我們需要知道誰有利害關係，
08:19
in trying to shape the outcome of a decision.
172
481000
5000
要試圖影響一個決定的結果。
08:24
We need to know what they say they want,
173
486000
3000
我們需要知道他們說他們想要什麼，
08:27
not what they want in their heart of hearts,
174
489000
3000
而不是他們心中想要什麼，
08:30
not what they think they can get,
175
492000
2000
不是他們認為他們可以得到什麼，
08:32
but what they say they want, because that is a strategically chosen position,
176
494000
3000
而是他們說他們想要的是什麼，因為這是策略性選擇的位置，
08:35
and we can work backwards from that
177
497000
2000
我們可以從這倒退推算，
08:37
to draw inferences about important features of their decision-making.
178
499000
4000
由他們決策時的重要特質去推理。
08:41
We need to know how focused they are
179
503000
2000
我們需要知道他們有多關注，
08:43
on the problem at hand.
180
505000
2000
在手上的問題。
08:45
That is, how willing are they to drop what they're doing when the issue comes up,
181
507000
3000
就是在問題發生時，他們有多願意放下手上正在做的事，
08:48
and attend to it instead of something else that's on their plate --
182
510000
4000
會關注這件事而不是身邊其他的事--
08:52
how big a deal is it to them?
183
514000
2000
這事對他們有多重要？
08:54
And how much clout could they bring to bear
184
516000
3000
他們有多大的能耐可以影響決策，
08:57
if they chose to engage on the issue?
185
519000
5000
如果他們選擇關注這問題，
09:02
If we know those things
186
524000
2000
如果我們有這些資訊，
09:04
we can predict their behavior by assuming that everybody
187
526000
3000
我們就可以預測他們的行為，
09:07
cares about two things on any decision.
188
529000
5000
假設每個人在任何決定上關心兩件事，
09:12
They care about the outcome. They'd like an outcome as close to
189
534000
2000
他們關心結果，他們希望結果與他們
09:14
what they are interested in as possible.
190
536000
3000
的利益盡量的接近，
09:17
They're careerists, they also care about getting credit --
191
539000
3000
他們有自己的職志，關心信譽的建立，
09:20
there's ego involvement,
192
542000
2000
這裡有個人自我
09:22
they want to be seen as important in shaping the outcome,
193
544000
4000
他們希望被認為在形成結果上有重要性，
09:26
or as important, if it's their druthers, to block an outcome.
194
548000
5000
或者也很重要的，是他們的反對而阻止了某些結果的發生，
09:31
And so we have to figure out how they balance those two things.
195
553000
3000
所以我們需要辨認清楚他們是如何平衡那兩件事的，
09:34
Different people trade off
196
556000
2000
這因人而異，
09:36
between standing by their outcome,
197
558000
3000
人們有不同的立場不同的追求，
09:39
faithfully holding to it, going down in a blaze of glory,
198
561000
3000
有的人堅持，追求榮耀，
09:42
or giving it up, putting their finger in the wind,
199
564000
3000
或者放棄，見風使舵，
09:45
and doing whatever they think is going to be a winning position.
200
567000
3000
而做任何他們認為最有利的，
09:48
Most people fall in between, and if we can work out where they fall
201
570000
3000
多數人介於兩者之間，如果我們能夠認清他們處於那裡，
09:51
we can work out how to negotiate with them
202
573000
2000
我們就可以認清如何與他們談判，
09:53
to change their behavior.
203
575000
2000
以改變他們的行為。
09:55
So with just that little bit of input
204
577000
3000
所以只要這麼一點輸入的資訊，
09:58
we can work out what the choices are that people have,
205
580000
3000
我們就能知道別的人有些什麼可能的選擇，
10:01
what the chances are that they're willing to take,
206
583000
3000
他們願意接受的機會有多大，
10:04
what they're after, what they value, what they want,
207
586000
3000
他們追求的是什麼，他們的價值觀如何，他們期望什麼，
10:07
and what they believe about other people.
208
589000
3000
他們眼中的別人是如何，
10:10
You might notice what we don't need to know:
209
592000
4000
你也許也注意到一些我們不需要知道的，
10:14
there's no history in here.
210
596000
2000
這裡不需要歷史記錄，
10:16
How they got to where they are
211
598000
2000
關於他們是如何成為現在這樣的，
10:18
may be important in shaping the input information,
212
600000
2000
對如何形成所輸入的資訊可能有重要性，
10:20
but once we know where they are
213
602000
2000
但一旦我們知道他們現狀是如何後，
10:22
we're worried about where they're going to be headed in the future.
214
604000
3000
我們就會想知道他們未來會朝那個方向發展，
10:25
How they got there turns out not to be terribly critical in predicting.
215
607000
4000
他們如何變成現狀的，在預測上就不是這麼重要，
10:29
I remind you of that 90 percent accuracy rate.
216
611000
4000
提醒你們這是90%的準確性，
10:33
So where are we going to get this information?
217
615000
2000
所以我們要從那裡獲得這些資訊？
10:35
We can get this information
218
617000
3000
我們可以獲得這些資訊，
10:38
from the Internet, from The Economist,
219
620000
3000
從互聯網，從《經濟學人》雜誌、
10:41
The Financial Times, The New York Times,
220
623000
3000
從《金融時報》、《紐約時報》，
10:44
U.S. News and World Report, lots of sources like that,
221
626000
3000
《美國新聞》與《世界報導》，還有很多類似的來源，
10:47
or we can get it from asking experts
222
629000
2000
或者可以從請教專家而得到，
10:49
who spend their lives studying places and problems,
223
631000
3000
這些專家長期研究各地方的問題，
10:52
because those experts know this information.
224
634000
3000
因為這些專家知道這些資訊，
10:55
If they don't know, who are the people trying to influence the decision,
225
637000
3000
如果他們不知道，那麼是誰會能影響決策，
10:58
how much clout do they have,
226
640000
2000
他們有多大的影響力，
11:00
how much they care about this issue, and what do they say they want,
227
642000
3000
他們對這問題有多關心，他們對所希望的怎麼說，
11:03
are they experts? That's what it means to be an expert,
228
645000
3000
他們是專家嗎？專家應該知道這些，
11:06
that's the basic stuff an expert needs to know.
229
648000
4000
那是一個專家需要知道的基本資料，
11:10
Alright, lets turn to Iran.
230
652000
2000
好，讓我們看伊朗問題，
11:12
Let me make three important predictions --
231
654000
3000
我在這做三個重要的預測--
11:15
you can check this out, time will tell.
232
657000
3000
你可以檢驗這些預測的正確性，時間會證明，
11:18
What is Iran going to do about its nuclear weapons program?
233
660000
8000
伊朗的核武計劃將來會如何？
11:26
How secure is the theocratic regime in Iran?
234
668000
3000
伊朗的神權政府是多穩定？
11:29
What's its future?
235
671000
2000
未來如何?
11:31
And everybody's best friend,
236
673000
3000
還有大家的好朋友，
11:34
Ahmadinejad. How are things going for him?
237
676000
3000
艾瑪迪-內賈德，他將來會如何？
11:37
How are things going to be working out for him in the next year or two?
238
679000
6000
在未來一兩年他的地位會怎樣演變？
11:43
You take a look at this, this is not based on statistics.
239
685000
3000
你看這裡，這不是依據統計，
11:46
I want to be very clear here. I'm not projecting some past data into the future.
240
688000
5000
在這裡我要說清楚，我不是以過去的數據延伸來推測未來，
11:51
I've taken inputs on positions and so forth,
241
693000
3000
我是以各個人的立場為輸入資料，
11:54
run it through a computer model
242
696000
2000
經電腦模型運算，
11:56
that had simulated the dynamics of interaction,
243
698000
3000
模擬動態的相互作用，
11:59
and these are the simulated dynamics,
244
701000
2000
這些經過模擬的動態，
12:01
the predictions about the path of policy.
245
703000
3000
就是政策變化過程的預測，
12:04
So you can see here on the vertical axis,
246
706000
3000
所以你可以在縱軸上看到，
12:07
I haven't shown it all the way down to zero,
247
709000
2000
我沒有顯示它一直向下走到零
12:09
there are lots of other options, but here I'm just showing you the prediction,
248
711000
3000
有很多可能的選項，但這裡我只向各位展示預測，
12:12
so I've narrowed the scale.
249
714000
2000
我將比例縮窄，
12:14
Up at the top of the axis, "Build the Bomb."
250
716000
3000
在軸線的頂端，是要建造核彈，
12:17
At 130, we start somewhere above 130,
251
719000
4000
那是130，我們從高於130開始，
12:21
between building a bomb, and making enough weapons-grade fuel
252
723000
3000
在建造核彈與製造足夠的核武等級燃料之間，
12:24
so that you could build a bomb.
253
726000
2000
這樣就可以建造核彈，
12:26
That's where, according to my analyses,
254
728000
3000
這是依據我的分析，
12:29
the Iranians were at the beginning of this year.
255
731000
3000
伊朗今年初的位置，
12:32
And then the model makes predictions down the road.
256
734000
3000
然後這模型預測後來的變化，
12:35
At 115 they would only produce enough weapons grade fuel
257
737000
4000
在115表示伊朗能生產足夠的核彈等級的燃料，
12:39
to show that they know how, but they wouldn't build a weapon:
258
741000
2000
展現他們有此能力，但不去建造武器，
12:41
they would build a research quantity.
259
743000
2000
他們只建立了足夠研究的數量，
12:43
It would achieve some national pride,
260
745000
2000
達到國家榮譽的程度，
12:45
but not go ahead and build a weapon.
261
747000
3000
但不再往前建造武器，
12:48
And down at 100 they would build civilian nuclear energy,
262
750000
2000
到100表示他們建立民生用的核能發電，
12:50
which is what they say is their objective.
263
752000
4000
這是他們所宣稱的目標，
12:54
The yellow line shows us the most likely path.
264
756000
3000
這黃線代表最可能的發展路徑，
12:57
The yellow line includes an analysis
265
759000
1000
這黃線包含了分析
12:58
of 87 decision makers in Iran,
266
760000
3000
87名伊朗的決策人士，
13:01
and a vast number of outside influencers
267
763000
3000
以及大量的外部有力人士
13:04
trying to pressure Iran into changing its behavior,
268
766000
3000
他們對伊朗施壓 要改變它的行為，
13:07
various players in the United States, and Egypt,
269
769000
3000
許多在美國以及埃及的人士，
13:10
and Saudi Arabia, and Russia, European Union,
270
772000
2000
還有沙烏地阿拉伯、蘇俄、歐盟、
13:12
Japan, so on and so forth.
271
774000
2000
日本，等等
13:14
The white line reproduces the analysis
272
776000
4000
這白線是再一次的分析，
13:18
if the international environment
273
780000
2000
假如國際環境
13:20
just left Iran to make its own internal decisions,
274
782000
3000
讓伊朗自己內部做決定，
13:23
under its own domestic political pressures.
275
785000
2000
在它自己國內的政治壓力下--
13:25
That's not going to be happening,
276
787000
2000
那是不會發生的--
13:27
but you can see that the line comes down faster
277
789000
4000
但你能看到這條線下降得快一些，
13:31
if they're not put under international pressure,
278
793000
3000
如果沒有國際壓力，
13:34
if they're allowed to pursue their own devices.
279
796000
2000
如果他們能夠以自己的方式追求，
13:36
But in any event, by the end of this year,
280
798000
3000
但任何情況下，到今年底，
13:39
beginning of next year, we get to a stable equilibrium outcome.
281
801000
3000
從明年開始，我們會達到平衡穩定的結果，
13:42
And that equilibrium is not what the United States would like,
282
804000
4000
這平衡點不是美國所盼望的，
13:46
but it's probably an equilibrium that the United States can live with,
283
808000
3000
但可能是美國能夠接受的平衡狀態，
13:49
and that a lot of others can live with.
284
811000
2000
還有很多其他國家也可以接受，
13:51
And that is that Iran will achieve that nationalist pride
285
813000
4000
那是伊朗能夠達成國家榮譽的程度，
13:55
by making enough weapons-grade fuel, through research,
286
817000
4000
並經由研究而製作出足夠的武器等級燃料，
13:59
so that they could show that they know how to make weapons-grade fuel,
287
821000
4000
這樣他們可以炫耀他們知道如何製造武器等級的燃料，
14:03
but not enough to actually build a bomb.
288
825000
5000
但不足以實際製造核彈，
14:08
How is this happening?
289
830000
2000
這怎麼發生的？
14:10
Over here you can see this is the distribution
290
832000
4000
這裡你可以看到這是權利的分配
14:14
of power in favor of civilian nuclear energy today,
291
836000
5000
它有利於今天民生用途的核能發電，
14:19
this is what that power block is predicted to be like
292
841000
3000
這是依據權利分配而預測出來的，
14:22
by the late parts of 2010, early parts of 2011.
293
844000
6000
在2010年底2011年初，
14:28
Just about nobody supports research on weapons-grade fuel today,
294
850000
4000
還沒有人支持武器等級核燃料的研究，
14:32
but by 2011 that gets to be a big block,
295
854000
3000
但到2011年，那成為很大的力量，
14:35
and you put these two together, that's the controlling influence in Iran.
296
857000
4000
你把這兩個加在一起，對伊朗有控制性的影響力，
14:39
Out here today, there are a bunch of people --
297
861000
3000
今天，有許多人--
14:42
Ahmadinejad for example --
298
864000
2000
像艾瑪迪內賈德--
14:44
who would like not only to build a bomb,
299
866000
2000
他不僅希望建造核彈，
14:46
but test a bomb.
300
868000
2000
還測試這炸彈，
14:48
That power disappears completely;
301
870000
2000
這個力量完全消失了，
14:50
nobody supports that by 2011.
302
872000
3000
到2011年已經沒人支持這觀點。
14:53
These guys are all shrinking,
303
875000
2000
這群人數在萎縮，
14:55
the power is all drifting out here,
304
877000
3000
權力流到這邊，
14:58
so the outcome is going to be the weapons-grade fuel.
305
880000
3000
所以結果是武器等級的燃料，
15:01
Who are the winners and who are the losers in Iran?
306
883000
3000
誰是伊朗的贏家與輸家呢？
15:04
Take a look at these guys, they're growing in power,
307
886000
3000
看這些人，他們的權力在增加，
15:07
and by the way, this was done a while ago
308
889000
3000
順便說一下，這是不久前做的，
15:10
before the current economic crisis,
309
892000
2000
是在現在這經濟危機之前，
15:12
and that's probably going to get steeper.
310
894000
2000
現在可能會更為傾斜，
15:14
These folks are the moneyed interests in Iran,
311
896000
2000
這些人是伊朗有權勢的人，
15:16
the bankers, the oil people, the bazaaries.
312
898000
4000
銀行家，油人，商家，
15:20
They are growing in political clout,
313
902000
3000
他們的政治影響力都在成長，
15:23
as the mullahs are isolating themselves --
314
905000
3000
在穆斯林神職人員自我隔絕時--
15:26
with the exception of one group of mullahs,
315
908000
2000
除了有一群教士外，
15:28
who are not well known to Americans.
316
910000
2000
美國人一般不知道他們，
15:30
That's this line here, growing in power,
317
912000
2000
只有他們的權力在擴張，
15:32
these are what the Iranians call the quietists.
318
914000
4000
伊朗人稱他們為Quietists教派，
15:36
These are the Ayatollahs, mostly based in Qom,
319
918000
3000
他們被稱為阿亞圖拉，主要存在於庫姆這地區，
15:39
who have great clout in the religious community,
320
921000
4000
他們在宗教圈裡很有影響力，
15:43
have been quiet on politics and are going to be getting louder,
321
925000
3000
以往對政治沉默，現在聲音愈來愈大，
15:46
because they see Iran going in an unhealthy direction,
322
928000
2000
因為他們覺得伊朗走向不健康的方向，
15:48
a direction contrary
323
930000
2000
一個反方向
15:50
to what Khomeini had in mind.
324
932000
4000
與柯梅尼心中希望的。
15:54
Here is Mr. Ahmadinejad.
325
936000
2000
這位是艾馬迪內賈德總統，
15:56
Two things to notice: he's getting weaker,
326
938000
3000
兩件事值得注意，他變弱了，
15:59
and while he gets a lot of attention in the United States,
327
941000
2000
當他在美國受到許多注意時，
16:01
he is not a major player in Iran.
328
943000
2000
他在伊朗卻不是很重要的人，
16:03
He is on the way down.
329
945000
2000
他在走下坡，
16:05
OK, so I'd like you to take a little away from this.
330
947000
4000
好的，我要你們注意力從這移開一下，
16:09
Everything is not predictable: the stock market
331
951000
2000
不是所有事情都能預測，股票市場
16:11
is, at least for me, not predictable,
332
953000
3000
至少對我是不能預測的，
16:14
but most complicated negotiations are predictable.
333
956000
5000
但多數複雜的談判是可以預測的，
16:19
Again, whether we're talking health policy, education,
334
961000
4000
不管是談健保政策、教育、
16:23
environment, energy,
335
965000
3000
環境、能源、
16:26
litigation, mergers,
336
968000
2000
訴訟、併購，
16:28
all of these are complicated problems
337
970000
2000
這些都是複雜的問題，
16:30
that are predictable,
338
972000
2000
它們是可以預測的，
16:32
that this sort of technology can be applied to.
339
974000
4000
可以應用這類的技術，
16:36
And the reason that being able to predict those things is important,
340
978000
5000
而能夠預測這些事情的原因是重要的，
16:41
is not just because you might run a hedge fund and make money off of it,
341
983000
3000
不是因為你可能經營一個避險基金，要從它賺錢，
16:44
but because if you can predict what people will do,
342
986000
3000
而是因為假如你能夠預測人們將怎麼做，
16:47
you can engineer what they will do.
343
989000
3000
你就能夠控制他們將做什麼，
16:50
And if you engineer what they do you can change the world,
344
992000
2000
如果你能控制他們要做什麼，你就能改變這世界，
16:52
you can get a better result.
345
994000
2000
你可能得到較好的結果，
16:54
I would like to leave you with one thought, which is
346
996000
3000
我想留個問題給你們思考，
16:57
for me, the dominant theme of this gathering,
347
999000
5000
對我，這聚會的重要議題，
17:02
and is the dominant theme of this way of thinking about the world.
348
1004000
3000
也是這樣思考世界問題的主要論點就是，
17:05
When people say to you,
349
1007000
3000
當人們對你說，
17:08
"That's impossible,"
350
1010000
2000
“那個不可能，”
17:10
you say back to them,
351
1012000
2000
你回應說，
17:12
"When you say 'That's impossible,'
352
1014000
2000
“當你說‘那個不可能，’
17:14
you're confused with,
353
1016000
2000
你真的意思是，
17:16
'I don't know how to do it.'"
354
1018000
3000
”我不知道怎麼做“
17:19
Thank you.
355
1021000
2000
謝謝
17:21
(Applause)
356
1023000
4000
（掌聲）
17:25
Chris Anderson: One question for you.
357
1027000
2000
安德森：請教個問題，
17:27
That was fascinating.
358
1029000
3000
這個很棒，
17:30
I love that you put it out there.
359
1032000
3000
很高興你提出來，
17:33
I got very nervous halfway through the talk though,
360
1035000
2000
但聽講到一半時，我變得緊張，
17:35
just panicking whether you'd included in your model, the possibility that
361
1037000
3000
不知在你的模型中，會包含可能性
17:38
putting this prediction out there might change the result.
362
1040000
4000
做這些預測可能改變結果，
17:42
We've got 800 people in Tehran who watch TEDTalks.
363
1044000
3000
我們在德黑蘭有800人觀看這演講，
17:45
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita: I've thought about that,
364
1047000
2000
我想到這個，
17:47
and since I've done a lot of work for the intelligence community,
365
1049000
4000
我們為精英社群做了許多工作，
17:51
they've also pondered that.
366
1053000
2000
他們也考慮
17:53
It would be a good thing if
367
1055000
3000
那將是好事如果
17:56
people paid more attention, took seriously,
368
1058000
3000
人們更加注意，嚴肅對待，
17:59
and engaged in the same sorts of calculations,
369
1061000
2000
也進行相似的算計，
18:01
because it would change things. But it would change things in two beneficial ways.
370
1063000
4000
因為這會改變事情，它會在兩個有利的方面改變事情，
18:05
It would hasten how quickly people arrive at an agreement,
371
1067000
6000
他們提高 人們達成協議的速度，
18:11
and so it would save everybody a lot of grief and time.
372
1073000
3000
所以它會節省每個人許多痛苦與時間。
18:14
And, it would arrive at an agreement that everybody was happy with,
373
1076000
4000
它也會達成每個人都喜歡的協議，
18:18
without having to manipulate them so much --
374
1080000
3000
而不需要非常操控他們--
18:21
which is basically what I do, I manipulate them.
375
1083000
3000
這也就是我現在做的，我操控他們，
18:24
So it would be a good thing.
376
1086000
2000
這將是個好事，
18:26
CA: So you're kind of trying to say, "People of Iran, this is your destiny, lets go there."
377
1088000
4000
安德森：所以你是在客氣的說 ，“伊朗人，這是你們命定的，我們往這前進。”
18:30
BBM: Well, people of Iran, this is what many of you are going to evolve to want,
378
1092000
6000
BBM：伊朗人，這是你們許多人將會轉變而期望的，
18:36
and we could get there a lot sooner,
379
1098000
2000
我們可以快一點達到那裡，
18:38
and you would suffer a lot less trouble from economic sanctions,
380
1100000
3000
這樣你也少受一些經濟制裁帶來的困難，
18:41
and we would suffer a lot less fear of the use of military force on our end,
381
1103000
6000
我們也會少受點軍事威脅的恐懼，
18:47
and the world would be a better place.
382
1109000
2000
世界也變得更可愛些，
18:49
CA: Here's hoping they hear it that way. Thank you very much Bruce.
383
1111000
3000
安德森：這是期望他們所聽到的，謝謝你。
18:52
BBM: Thank you.
384
1114000
2000
BBM:謝謝。
18:54
(Applause)
385
1116000
5000
（掌聲）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita - Political scientistA consultant to the CIA and the Department of Defense, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita has built an intricate computer model that can predict the outcomes of international conflicts with bewildering accuracy.
Why you should listen
Every motive has a number, says Bruce Bueno de Mesquita. A specialist in foreign policy, international relations and state building, he is also a leading -- if controversial -- scholar of rational choice theory, which says math underlies the nation-scale consequences of individuals acting for personal benefit. He created forecasting technology that has, time and again, exceeded the accuracy of old-school analysis, even with thorny quarrels charged by obscure contenders, and often against odds. (One example: He called the second Intifada two years in advance.)
Bueno de Mesquita's company, Mesquita & Roundell, sells his system's predictions and analysis to influential government and private institutions that need heads-ups on policy. He teaches at NYU and is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita | Speaker | TED.com