TED@Cannes
Clay Shirky: How cognitive surplus will change the world
Clay Shirky：認知剩餘將如何改變世界
Filmed:
Readability: 4.5
1,065,787 views
Clay Shirky提出"認知剩餘"--我們在網路上作分享的工作時的空閒時間。當我們埋首於Wikipedia的編輯、在Ushahidi上發佈訊息(當然，還有在LOLcats)，我們就是正在建立一個更好、更有合作性的世界。
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.
00:16
The story starts in Kenya
0
1000
2000
我要先從
00:18
in December of 2007,
1
3000
2000
2007年12月的肯亞說起，
00:20
when there was a disputed presidential election,
2
5000
2000
當時肯亞的總統大選備受爭議。
00:22
and in the immediate aftermath of that election,
3
7000
3000
選舉後的不久，
00:25
there was an outbreak of ethnic violence.
4
10000
2000
肯亞境內就爆發了種族暴力事件。
00:27
And there was a lawyer in Nairobi, Ory Okolloh --
5
12000
3000
有位來自首都奈洛比的律師，Ory Okolloh--
00:30
who some of you may know from her TEDTalk --
6
15000
2000
各位之中可能有人在TEDTalk聽過她演講--
00:32
who began blogging about it on her site,
7
17000
2000
她在自己的網站寫下這次事件的感想，
00:34
Kenyan Pundit.
8
19000
2000
這網站名為Kenyan Pundit。
00:36
And shortly after the election and the outbreak of violence,
9
21000
3000
在選舉和暴力事件後沒多久，
00:39
the government suddenly imposed
10
24000
2000
政府突然
00:41
a significant media blackout.
11
26000
2000
就封鎖了所有媒體管道。
00:43
And so weblogs went from being
12
28000
2000
網路上的部落格文章，
00:45
commentary as part of the media landscape
13
30000
2000
目的是要嘗試探討暴力事件始末，
00:47
to being a critical part of the media landscape
14
32000
3000
從原本是評論風格的媒體，
00:50
in trying to understand where the violence was.
15
35000
3000
變成了大肆批評的光景。
00:53
And Okolloh solicited
16
38000
2000
Okolloh女士，
00:55
from her commenters
17
40000
2000
對部落格的讀者，
00:57
more information about what was going on.
18
42000
2000
徵求更多關於此事件的資訊。
00:59
The comments began pouring in,
19
44000
2000
讀者的回應如排山倒海的出現了。
01:01
and Okolloh would collate them. She would post them.
20
46000
2000
Okolloh將這些回應做整理後，隨之公開。
01:03
And she quickly said, "It's too much.
21
48000
2000
很快的她就覺得：「這些資訊實在太多了，」
01:05
I could do this all day every day
22
50000
2000
「我得花上一整天做整理工作，」
01:07
and I can't keep up.
23
52000
2000
「真的沒辦法一直持續下去。」
01:09
There is more information
24
54000
2000
「這些有關」
01:11
about what's going on in Kenya right now
25
56000
2000
「肯亞目前情形的資訊，」
01:13
than any one person can manage.
26
58000
2000
「已經多到超過人所能管理的份量。」
01:15
If only there was a way to automate this."
27
60000
2000
「除非有自動化的軟體或相關設備。」
01:17
And two programmers who read her blog
28
62000
2000
有2個程式設計師看到了她的部落格文章，
01:19
held their hands up and said, "We could do that,"
29
64000
3000
說：「我們可以幫妳做這種程式。」
01:22
and in 72 hours, they launched Ushahidi.
30
67000
3000
72小時後，一個名為Ushahidi網站出現了。
01:25
Ushahidi -- the name means "witness"
31
70000
2000
Ushahidi，在斯瓦希里語中(東非地區的第二語言)
01:27
or "testimony" in Swahili --
32
72000
2000
這字的意思是"見證人"或"證詞"，
01:29
is a very simple way of taking reports from the field,
33
74000
3000
在這裡，你能輕易的陳述任何地區的報導，
01:32
whether it's from the web or, critically,
34
77000
3000
不論你是要透過網路發佈訊息，或緊急的時候，
01:35
via mobile phones and SMS,
35
80000
2000
也能透過手機或是簡訊來發佈訊息，
01:37
aggregating it and putting it on a map.
36
82000
3000
網站會蒐集這些資料，並將資訊呈現在地圖上。
01:40
That's all it is, but that's all that's needed
37
85000
2000
這網站就這樣，但就足夠了。
01:42
because what it does is it takes the tacit information
38
87000
3000
因為這個網站將那些心照不宣的資訊
01:45
available to the whole population --
39
90000
2000
公開給大眾瀏覽，
01:47
everybody knows where the violence is,
40
92000
2000
每個人都知道暴力事件在哪發生，
01:49
but no one person knows what everyone knows --
41
94000
3000
但是沒人了解別人到底知道了什麼，
01:52
and it takes that tacit information
42
97000
2000
於是這個網站蒐集了所有隱性訊息，
01:54
and it aggregates it,
43
99000
2000
整理這些訊息，
01:56
and it maps it and it makes it public.
44
101000
2000
然後用地圖的方式公開呈現。
01:58
And that, that maneuver
45
103000
2000
這種手法
02:00
called "crisis mapping,"
46
105000
2000
稱為"危機製圖"(註：crisis mapping)。
02:02
was kicked off in Kenya
47
107000
3000
網站在2008年1月
02:05
in January of 2008.
48
110000
2000
在肯亞正式上線。
02:07
And enough people looked at it and found it valuable enough
49
112000
3000
當網站受到的關注眼光和價值都到了一定程度後，
02:10
that the programmers who created Ushahidi
50
115000
2000
設計Ushahidi網站的2位程式設計師，
02:12
decided they were going to make it open source
51
117000
2000
就決定將網站的程式碼公開
02:14
and turn it into a platform.
52
119000
2000
且將它轉變成一個平台。
02:16
It's since been deployed in Mexico
53
121000
2000
這網站追蹤了
02:18
to track electoral fraud.
54
123000
2000
墨西哥的賄選事件。
02:20
It's been deployed in Washington D.C. to track snow cleanup.
55
125000
3000
它也追蹤了華盛頓的大雪清理過程。(註：2010年2月華盛頓大雪破百年紀錄)
02:23
And it's been used most famously in Haiti
56
128000
2000
海地大地震後的救災行動，
02:25
in the aftermath of the earthquake.
57
130000
3000
這網站也發揮了用處。
02:28
And when you look at the map
58
133000
2000
當你來到Ushahidi的首頁，
02:30
now posted on the Ushahidi front page,
59
135000
2000
能看到目前的地圖資訊，
02:32
you can see that the number of deployments in Ushahidi
60
137000
2000
上面顯示目前Ushahidi
02:34
has gone worldwide, all right?
61
139000
3000
在世界各地的平台點，是吧？
02:37
This went from a single idea
62
142000
2000
這個網站
02:39
and a single implementation
63
144000
2000
只不過是2008年
02:41
in East Africa in the beginning of 2008
64
146000
3000
才從東非竄起的一個小構想和小成果，
02:44
to a global deployment
65
149000
2000
不到3年的時間
02:46
in less than three years.
66
151000
3000
它就成為部屬在世界各地的平台了。
02:49
Now what Okolloh did
67
154000
3000
沒有數位技術，
02:52
would not have been possible
68
157000
2000
Okolloh女士
02:54
without digital technology.
69
159000
3000
根本不可能完成資料的彙整。
02:57
What Okolloh did would not have been possible
70
162000
3000
而沒有群眾大方的提供資訊，
03:00
without human generosity.
71
165000
2000
Okolloh也不可能完成。
03:02
And the interesting moment now,
72
167000
2000
有趣的是，
03:04
the number of environments
73
169000
2000
這是當今
03:06
where the social design challenge
74
171000
2000
社會化設計中(註：socail design，利用網路讓人們能互相交流的行為)，
03:08
relies on both of those things being true.
75
173000
3000
必須要依賴的2個元素。
03:11
That is the resource that I'm talking about.
76
176000
3000
這個是我今天想跟各位談的資源。
03:14
I call it cognitive surplus.
77
179000
2000
我稱這項資源為"認知剩餘"(cognitive surplus)。
03:16
And it represents the ability
78
181000
2000
這是一種
03:18
of the world's population
79
183000
2000
來自全世界群眾的能力，
03:20
to volunteer and to contribute and collaborate
80
185000
3000
它是自願的，貢獻的，合作的，
03:23
on large, sometimes global, projects.
81
188000
3000
並應用於大型，甚至全球性的專案。
03:26
Cognitive surplus is made up of two things.
82
191000
2000
認知剩餘由2種東西組成。
03:28
The first, obviously, is the world's free time and talents.
83
193000
3000
第一個，很明顯的，就是所有人的閒暇時間和才能。
03:31
The world has over
84
196000
2000
全世界
03:33
a trillion hours a year
85
198000
3000
一年有超過1兆小時的閒暇時間
03:36
of free time
86
201000
2000
致力於
03:38
to commit to shared projects.
87
203000
2000
某些共同的項目上。
03:40
Now, that free time existed in the 20th century,
88
205000
2000
20世紀人們就有自己的閒暇時間了，
03:42
but we didn't get Ushahidi in the 20th century.
89
207000
3000
但在20世紀可沒有Ushahidi這個網站。
03:45
That's the second half of cognitive surplus.
90
210000
2000
接著是認知剩餘的另一半。
03:47
The media landscape in the 20th century
91
212000
2000
20世紀的媒體環境
03:49
was very good at helping people consume,
92
214000
3000
助長了人們的消費行為。
03:52
and we got, as a result,
93
217000
2000
也因此，
03:54
very good at consuming.
94
219000
2000
我們非常善於消費。
03:56
But now that we've been given media tools --
95
221000
2000
而當今我們的媒體工具，
03:58
the Internet, mobile phones -- that let us do more than consume,
96
223000
3000
像是網路、手機，這些促使我們做了更多消費的東西，
04:01
what we're seeing is that people weren't couch potatoes
97
226000
3000
讓人們不再是賴在電視前的懶蟲，
04:04
because we liked to be.
98
229000
2000
因為我們想去做別的事情了。
04:06
We were couch potatoes because that was
99
231000
2000
我們會喜歡賴在電視機前，是因為
04:08
the only opportunity given to us.
100
233000
2000
那是我們閒暇時的唯一選擇。
04:10
We still like to consume, of course.
101
235000
2000
當然，我們還是很喜歡消費。
04:12
But it turns out we also like to create,
102
237000
2000
但是新的媒體工具讓我們想要創造東西，
04:14
and we like to share.
103
239000
3000
甚至分享東西。
04:17
And it's those two things together --
104
242000
2000
新的工具和人的閒暇時間一合併，
04:19
ancient human motivation
105
244000
2000
也就是過去人類就有的閒暇時間，
04:21
and the modern tools to allow that motivation
106
246000
2000
加上當今最新的媒體工具，
04:23
to be joined up in large-scale efforts --
107
248000
3000
轉變成為一個更大規模的動力，
04:26
that are the new design resource.
108
251000
3000
就成了一種新的社會性設計資源。
04:29
And using cognitive surplus,
109
254000
2000
認知剩餘的使用，
04:31
we're starting to see truly incredible experiments
110
256000
3000
讓我們開始在許多領域做驚人的嘗試，
04:34
in scientific, literary,
111
259000
2000
像是在科學上，文學上，
04:36
artistic, political efforts.
112
261000
3000
藝術，政治推動。
04:39
Designing.
113
264000
2000
還有設計領域。
04:41
We're also getting, of course, a lot of LOLcats.
114
266000
3000
這些圖片都是來自「LoLcats」網站。
04:44
LOLcats are cute pictures of cats
115
269000
2000
LoLcats網站上都是可愛的小貓圖片，
04:46
made cuter with the addition of cute captions.
116
271000
3000
然後再搭配逗趣的文字(註：圖和文字都是由網友自行上傳設計)。
04:49
And they are also
117
274000
2000
而這正是
04:51
part of the abundant media landscape we're getting now.
118
276000
3000
我們目前豐沛的媒體成果之一。
04:54
This is one of the participatory --
119
279000
2000
這是一種與他人合作的案例。
04:56
one of the participatory models
120
281000
2000
而另一種與他人合作的模式
04:58
we see coming out of that, along with Ushahidi.
121
283000
3000
就是剛介紹的Ushahidi。
05:01
Now I want to stipulate, as the lawyers say,
122
286000
2000
若從一個正經八百的律師的立場來看，
05:03
that LOLcats are the stupidest possible
123
288000
2000
LOLcats可能是個很蠢的
05:05
creative act.
124
290000
2000
創意成果。
05:07
There are other candidates of course,
125
292000
2000
當然我們還有很多類似的網站，
05:09
but LOLcats will do as a general case.
126
294000
3000
但是LOLcats是可以作為一個通例。
05:12
But here's the thing:
127
297000
2000
但其中有一點，
05:14
The stupidest possible creative act
128
299000
2000
就算可能是最蠢的創意成果，
05:16
is still a creative act.
129
301000
3000
它依舊是一個創意。
05:19
Someone who has done something like this,
130
304000
3000
曾經做過類似網站的人，
05:22
however mediocre and throwaway,
131
307000
3000
不論成果是平庸還是已被遺忘，
05:25
has tried something, has put something forward in public.
132
310000
3000
這些人都嘗試過，嘗試這把這些東西散播給大眾。
05:28
And once they've done it, they can do it again,
133
313000
3000
只要有人做過一次，就會有人就會再做一次。
05:31
and they could work on getting it better.
134
316000
2000
而且他們會越做越好。
05:33
There is a spectrum between mediocre work and good work,
135
318000
3000
平庸的作品和很棒的作品之間有個空間。
05:36
and as anybody who's worked as an artist or a creator knows,
136
321000
3000
不管是藝術家或是創意工作者都知道，
05:39
it's a spectrum you're constantly
137
324000
2000
這是你努力向上，爬到頂端之前的
05:41
struggling to get on top of.
138
326000
2000
一個空間。
05:43
The gap is between
139
328000
2000
這個缺口介乎於
05:45
doing anything and doing nothing.
140
330000
3000
有點成果和一事無成的二者之間。
05:48
And someone who makes a LOLcat
141
333000
2000
所以創建LOLcats網站的人
05:50
has already crossed over that gap.
142
335000
3000
就是已經跨越了這個缺口。
05:53
Now it's tempting to want to get the Ushahidis
143
338000
2000
但如果說我們比較需要Ushahidis，
05:55
without the LOLcats, right,
144
340000
2000
並非LOLcats，
05:57
to get the serious stuff without the throwaway stuff.
145
342000
3000
或說我們比較想要嚴肅的產物，而非偏廣告消費性質的。
06:00
But media abundance never works that way.
146
345000
3000
媒體的多樣性並不會導致這種情形。
06:03
Freedom to experiment means freedom to experiment with anything.
147
348000
3000
自由實驗，意思就是你能自由的針對任何事情做嘗試。
06:06
Even with the sacred printing press,
148
351000
2000
即使有了偉大的印刷機，
06:08
we got erotic novels 150 years
149
353000
2000
在科學期刊問世以前，
06:10
before we got scientific journals.
150
355000
3000
我們還不是先用印刷機印了150年的色情小說。
06:14
So before I talk about
151
359000
3000
在我說明Ushahidi和LOLcats
06:17
what is, I think, the critical difference
152
362000
2000
這2個網站的差異之前，
06:19
between LOLcats and Ushahidi,
153
364000
2000
我想先談談
06:21
I want to talk about
154
366000
2000
這2個網站
06:23
their shared source.
155
368000
2000
它們所分享的資源。
06:25
And that source is design for generosity.
156
370000
3000
這種資源來自大眾的慷慨。
06:28
It is one of the curiosities of our historical era
157
373000
3000
在歷史上，目前是我們好奇心最強的時代，
06:31
that even as cognitive surplus
158
376000
2000
認知剩餘
06:33
is becoming a resource we can design around,
159
378000
2000
變成一項被我們利用的資源，
06:35
social sciences are also starting to explain
160
380000
3000
社會學家開始去解釋
06:38
how important
161
383000
2000
我們的內在動機
06:40
our intrinsic motivations are to us,
162
385000
2000
對我們是多麼重要，
06:42
how much we do things because we like to do them
163
387000
3000
我們會做多少事，完全仰賴我們有多喜歡這件事，
06:45
rather than because our boss told us to do them,
164
390000
2000
並非是老闆叫我們去做，
06:47
or because we're being paid to do them.
165
392000
3000
或是為了酬勞。
06:50
This is a graph from a paper
166
395000
3000
畫面上的圖表
06:53
by Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini,
167
398000
2000
是從Uri Gneezy和Aldo Rustichini這2位學者合著的論文而來，
06:55
who set out to test, at the beginning of this decade,
168
400000
3000
這個實驗從10年前就開始進行，
06:58
what they called "deterrence theory."
169
403000
2000
稱之「嚇阻理論」(deterrence theory)。
07:00
And deterrence theory is a very simple theory of human behavior:
170
405000
2000
嚇阻理論是一個非常簡易的人類行為理論。
07:02
If you want somebody to do less of something,
171
407000
2000
若你想要某人事情做少一點，
07:04
add a punishment and they'll do less of it.
172
409000
2000
利用懲罰就能達到效果。
07:06
Simple, straightforward, commonsensical --
173
411000
3000
這種想法非常簡單，直覺，也是常識，
07:09
also, largely untested.
174
414000
2000
但根本沒做過實驗證明。
07:11
And so they went and studied
175
416000
2000
所以他們2位
07:13
10 daycare centers in Haifa, Israel.
176
418000
2000
針對在以色列海法城的10個托兒所進行實驗。
07:15
They studied those daycare centers
177
420000
2000
他們針對這10間托兒所
07:17
at the time of highest tension,
178
422000
2000
一天中最忙的時刻做研究，
07:19
which is pick-up time.
179
424000
2000
也就是下課後的家長接送時間。
07:21
At pick-up time the teachers,
180
426000
2000
在這段接送時間裡，
07:23
who have been with your children all day,
181
428000
2000
托兒所的老師已經和孩子們相處了一整天，
07:25
would like you to be there at the appointed hour to take your children back.
182
430000
3000
因此他們會希望家長能準時把小孩接走。
07:28
Meanwhile, the parents -- perhaps a little busy at work, running late, running errands --
183
433000
3000
但這個時候，這些父母也許因為工作，
07:31
want a little slack to pick the kids up late.
184
436000
3000
會稍微晚於指定的時間。
07:34
So Gneezy and Rustichini said,
185
439000
2000
Gneezy和Rustichini就好奇：
07:36
"How many instances of late pick-ups
186
441000
2000
「在這10個托兒所中，」
07:38
are there at these 10 daycare centers?"
187
443000
2000
「會有多少人在接送時間遲到的？」
07:40
Now they saw -- and this is what the graph is,
188
445000
2000
他們的實驗成果就如這張圖所示，
07:42
these are the number of weeks and these are the number of late arrivals --
189
447000
3000
橫座標是實驗的週數，縱座標是遲到的人數。
07:45
that there were between six and 10
190
450000
2000
平均來說，
07:47
instances of late pick-ups
191
452000
2000
一間托兒所中會遲到的家長數量，
07:49
on average in these 10 daycare centers.
192
454000
2000
大約是在6到10位之間。
07:51
So they divided the daycare centers into two groups.
193
456000
3000
於是他們將這幾間托兒所分成2組。
07:54
The white group there
194
459000
2000
白色線的部分
07:56
is the control group; they change nothing.
195
461000
3000
是對照組，不會有任何改變。
07:59
But the group of daycare centers represented by the black line,
196
464000
3000
黑線是實驗組，
08:02
they said, "We are changing this bargain
197
467000
2000
實驗組會跟父母說：
08:04
as of right now.
198
469000
2000
「讓我們改變一下目前的協議，」
08:06
If you pick your kid up more than 10 minutes late,
199
471000
2000
「若各位晚10分鐘來接小孩，」
08:08
we're going to add a 10 shekel fine to your bill.
200
473000
2000
「我們就被需酌收10謝克爾(約台幣82元)。」
08:10
Boom. No ifs, ands or buts."
201
475000
3000
「就這樣，不能有任何藉口。」
08:13
And the minute they did that,
202
478000
2000
於是實驗就開始了，
08:15
the behavior in those daycare centers changed.
203
480000
2000
托兒所也開始有了轉變。
08:17
Late pick-ups went up
204
482000
2000
在接下來的4週中
08:19
every week for the next four weeks
205
484000
3000
實驗組遲到的人數節節上升，
08:22
until they topped out at triple the pre-fine average,
206
487000
3000
直到罰金數字達到了3倍才緩下來，
08:25
and then they fluctuated
207
490000
2000
之後遲到的人數
08:27
at between double and triple the pre-fine average
208
492000
2000
就是徘徊在
08:29
for the life of the fine.
209
494000
2000
2倍罰金和3倍罰金之間。
08:31
And you can see immediately what happened, right?
210
496000
3000
沒錯，各位能請楚的看到圖表變化。
08:35
The fine broke the culture
211
500000
2000
罰金
08:37
of the daycare center.
212
502000
2000
破壞了托兒所固有的文化。
08:39
By adding a fine,
213
504000
2000
如果有罰金，
08:41
what they did was communicate to the parents
214
506000
2000
等於是跟這些父母說
08:43
that their entire debt to the teachers
215
508000
2000
你們因遲到欠老師的人情
08:45
had been discharged
216
510000
2000
只要付10謝克爾
08:47
with the payment of 10 shekels,
217
512000
2000
就可以獲得清償，
08:49
and that there was no residue of guilt or social concern
218
514000
3000
而這也可以免除
08:52
that the parents owed the teachers.
219
517000
2000
家長心中的罪惡感和社會觀感。
08:54
And so the parents, quite sensibly, said,
220
519000
2000
這些父母明智的認為：
08:56
"10 shekels to pick my kid up late?
221
521000
2000
「用10謝克爾換晚一點接小孩？」
08:58
What could be bad?"
222
523000
2000
「何樂而不為？」
09:00
(Laughter)
223
525000
2000
(笑)
09:04
The explanation of human behavior
224
529000
2000
這說明了我們從20世紀
09:06
that we inherited in the 20th century
225
531000
3000
遺留下來的人類行為，
09:09
was that we are all rational, self-maximizing actors,
226
534000
3000
就是理性和自利行為極大化。
09:12
and in that explanation --
227
537000
2000
托兒所並沒有和家長立定正式契約，
09:14
the daycare center had no contract --
228
539000
3000
所以在理性和自利行為下，
09:17
should have been operating without any constraints.
229
542000
3000
應該不需要任何條件，人都會選擇晚一點接小孩。
09:20
But that's not right.
230
545000
2000
但結果並不是這樣。
09:22
They were operating with social constraints
231
547000
2000
父母甘願交錢換晚一點接小孩是因為「社會約束」所致，
09:24
rather than contractual ones.
232
549000
2000
而非「文件契約」所致。
09:26
And critically, the social constraints
233
551000
2000
關鍵點在於，
09:28
created a culture that was more generous
234
553000
3000
社會約束比文件契約
09:31
than the contractual constraints did.
235
556000
2000
創造了更多樣的文化。
09:33
So Gneezy and Rustichini run this experiment for a dozen weeks --
236
558000
3000
Gneezy和Rustichini將這個實驗做了12週，
09:36
run the fine for a dozen weeks --
237
561000
2000
執行了12週的罰金制度，
09:38
and then they say, "Okay, that's it. All done; fine."
238
563000
3000
然後他們想：「好吧，罰金制度就到此為止。」
09:41
And then a really interesting thing happens:
239
566000
2000
更有趣的事情發生了。
09:43
Nothing changes.
240
568000
3000
遲到的人沒有變少。
09:46
The culture that got broken by the fine
241
571000
3000
固有的托兒所文化被罰金所破壞，
09:49
stayed broken when the fine was removed.
242
574000
3000
在取消罰金後，這固有的文化就無法恢復了。
09:52
Not only are economic motivations
243
577000
3000
不僅是經濟動機
09:55
and intrinsic motivations
244
580000
2000
和內在動機
09:57
incompatible,
245
582000
2000
2者之間的不相容(遲到罰錢造成更多人遲到)，
09:59
that incompatibility
246
584000
2000
而且這種不相容
10:01
can persist over long periods.
247
586000
3000
還會持續一段很長的時間。
10:04
So the trick
248
589000
2000
這種手法
10:06
in designing these kinds of situations
249
591000
2000
設計了一種情境，
10:08
is to understand where you're relying on
250
593000
3000
這讓你了解到，
10:11
the economic part of the bargain -- as with the parents paying the teachers --
251
596000
3000
什麼時候要用經濟來與人做交易，像父母會付10元給老師，
10:14
and when you're relying on the social part of the bargain,
252
599000
3000
什麼時候用社會行為與人做交易，
10:17
when you're really designing for generosity.
253
602000
3000
像是有人無償的設計出共享的網路資源。
10:20
This brings me back to the LOLcats
254
605000
3000
讓我們回到LoLcats
10:23
and to Ushahidi.
255
608000
2000
和Ushahidi。
10:25
This is, I think, the range that matters.
256
610000
2000
我認為，這2個網站跟剛才說的息息相關。
10:27
Both of these rely on cognitive surplus.
257
612000
2000
這2個網站都需要認知剩餘。
10:29
Both of these design for the assumption
258
614000
2000
這2者的設計原理是建立在某種假設上，
10:31
that people like to create and we want to share.
259
616000
3000
假設人們喜歡創造和分享。
10:34
Here is the critical difference between these:
260
619000
3000
但這2者最不同的關鍵點是，
10:39
LOLcats is communal value.
261
624000
3000
LoLcats是集體的價值(communal value)。
10:42
It's value created by the participants
262
627000
2000
這個網站的價值
10:44
for each other.
263
629000
2000
是參與者互相參與交流所建立的。
10:46
Communal value on the networks we have
264
631000
3000
這種人與人互相建立起的集體價值，
10:49
is everywhere --
265
634000
2000
網路上到處都是。
10:51
every time you see a large aggregate
266
636000
2000
你很容易找到一大堆、
10:53
of shared, publicly available data,
267
638000
3000
或是可以分享、公開的可用資料，
10:56
whether it's photos on Flickr
268
641000
2000
不論是在Flickr上的相片
10:58
or videos on Youtube or whatever.
269
643000
2000
或是在Youtube上的影片等等。
11:00
This is good. I like LOLcats as much as the next guy,
270
645000
2000
這種集體價值是很棒的。我跟大家一樣都喜歡LOLcats這個網站，
11:02
maybe a little more even,
271
647000
2000
搞不好喜歡的程度還比較高。
11:04
but this is also
272
649000
3000
這種網站
11:07
a largely solved problem.
273
652000
2000
同時也解決了一個很大的問題。
11:09
I have a hard time envisioning a future
274
654000
2000
因為在未來的日子裡
11:11
in which someone is saying,
275
656000
2000
我很難再遇見這樣講的人：
11:13
"Where, oh where, can I find a picture
276
658000
2000
「我要到哪裡才能找到」
11:15
of a cute cat?"
277
660000
2000
「可愛的貓咪照片阿？」
11:17
Ushahidi, by contrast,
278
662000
2000
相對的，Ushahidi
11:19
is civic value.
279
664000
2000
是一種公民的價值(civic value)。
11:21
It's value created by the participants
280
666000
2000
這網站的價值同樣來自參與者，
11:23
but enjoyed by society as a whole.
281
668000
2000
但整體上來看，它的價值是整個社會所享有的。
11:25
The goals set out by Ushahidi
282
670000
2000
Ushahidi的創立目的
11:27
are not just to make life better
283
672000
2000
不只是為了讓參與者
11:29
for the participants,
284
674000
2000
有更好的生活，
11:31
but to make life better for everyone in the society
285
676000
3000
所有生活在Ushahidi服務範圍的人，
11:34
in which Ushahidi is operating.
286
679000
2000
生活都變得更好。
11:36
And that kind of civic value
287
681000
3000
這種公民價值
11:39
is not just a side effect
288
684000
2000
並不僅僅只是
11:41
of opening up to human motivation.
289
686000
3000
人類需求拓展下的副產物。
11:44
It really is going to be a side effect
290
689000
2000
而應該是一種
11:46
of what we, collectively,
291
691000
2000
由我們全體
11:48
make of these kinds of efforts.
292
693000
3000
共同致力於某件事下的延伸產物。
11:51
There are a trillion
293
696000
2000
這一年的1兆小時
11:53
hours a year
294
698000
2000
是來自
11:55
of participatory value
295
700000
2000
參與者產生的價值，
11:57
up for grabs.
296
702000
2000
且這價值是供人任意使用的。
11:59
That will be true year-in and year-out.
297
704000
3000
這些時間每年都會有。
12:02
The number of people who are going to be able
298
707000
2000
願意參與
12:04
to participate in these kinds of projects
299
709000
2000
類似這些專案的人
12:06
is going to grow,
300
711000
2000
會越來越多。
12:08
and we can see that organizations
301
713000
3000
我們會發現
12:11
designed around a culture of generosity
302
716000
2000
具有這種慷慨奉獻文化的組織，
12:13
can achieve incredible effects
303
718000
2000
往往能達到許多不可思議的成就，
12:15
without an enormous amount of contractual overhead --
304
720000
3000
而且不需要龐大的管理開銷。
12:18
a very different model
305
723000
2000
這種模式是非常不同於
12:20
than our default model for large-scale group action in the 20th century.
306
725000
3000
我們在20世紀的行為模式。
12:24
What's going to make the difference here
307
729000
3000
這種不同點
12:27
is what Dean Kamen said,
308
732000
3000
就像Dean Kamen(兩輪電車Segway的發明者)
12:30
the inventor and entrepreneur.
309
735000
2000
這位發明家與創業家所說的：
12:32
Kamen said, "Free cultures get what they celebrate."
310
737000
3000
「讓我們讚揚這免費的文化吧。」
12:36
We've got a choice before us.
311
741000
3000
現在我們眼前有個選擇。
12:39
We've got this trillion hours a year.
312
744000
2000
現在我們一年有1兆小時可以用。
12:41
We can use it to crack each other up, and we're going to do that.
313
746000
3000
我們可以把這些時間拆散來自己使用，
12:44
That, we get for free.
314
749000
2000
或是用來創造更多共享的東西。
12:46
But we can also celebrate
315
751000
2000
我們應該也要讚揚、
12:48
and support and reward the people
316
753000
2000
協助、獎勵那些
12:50
trying to use cognitive surplus
317
755000
2000
試著將認知剩餘
12:52
to create civic value.
318
757000
2000
轉變成公民價值的人。
12:54
And to the degree we're going to do that, to the degree we're able to do that,
319
759000
3000
若我們都願意這樣做，都有能力這樣做，
12:57
we'll be able to change society.
320
762000
2000
我們就能改變這個社會。
12:59
Thank you very much.
321
764000
2000
謝謝各位。
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