This was in an area called Wellawatta, a prime residential area in Colombo. We stood on the railroad tracks that ran between my friend's house and the beach. The tracks are elevated about eight feet from the waterline normally, but at that point the water had receded to a level three or four feet below normal. I'd never seen the reef here before. There were fish caught in rock pools left behind by the receding water. Some children jumped down and ran to the rock pools with bags. They were trying to catch fish. No one realized that this was a very bad idea. The people on the tracks just continued to watch them. I turned around to check on my friend's house. Then someone on the tracks screamed. Before I could turn around, everyone on the tracks was screaming and running.
这个叫做Wellawatta的地方,是科伦坡的高级住宅区。 我们站在铁轨上 它从我朋友的房子和海滩之间穿过。 一般情况下铁轨会高于水位8英尺, 但是在那时候水已经退到 正常水位的3或者4英尺之下的位置了。 我以前从来没有在那看到过珊瑚。 潮水退后,那儿会有一些鱼被困在石头围成的小池子里。 一些孩子们拿着口袋跳下去,跑向那些小池子。 他们想抓鱼。 没有人意识到这是个非常糟糕的主意。 站在铁轨上的人只是看着这些孩子们。 我回过头去看我朋友的房子。 然后站在铁轨上的一些人开始尖叫。 我还没有回过头来,在铁轨上的每个人都开始尖叫,奔跑。
The water had started coming back. It was foaming over the reef. The children managed to run back onto the tracks. No one was lost there. But the water continued to climb. In about two minutes, it had reached the level of the railroad tracks and was coming over it. We had run about 100 meters by this time. It continued to rise. I saw an old man standing at his gate, knee-deep in water, refusing to move. He said he'd lived his whole life there by the beach, and that he would rather die there than run. A boy broke away from his mother to run back into his house to get his dog, who was apparently afraid. An old lady, crying, was carried out of her house and up the road by her son. The slum built on the railroad reservation between the sea and the railroad tracks was completely swept away. Since this was a high-risk location, the police had warned the residents, and no one was there when the water rose. But they had not had any time to evacuate any belongings. For hours afterwards, the sea was strewn with bits of wood for miles around -- all of this was from the houses in the slum. When the waters subsided, it was as if it had never existed.
水已经回来了。在珊瑚上泛起水沫。 孩子们跑回了铁轨上。 没有人落下。但是水一直在涨。 在两分钟之内,水已经漫到铁轨之上 即将把铁轨淹没。到那时我们跑了100多米远。 我继续踮起了脚看。 我看到一个老人站在他家门前齐膝深的水中,不愿离开。 他说他在海滩边已经住了一辈子, 他宁愿死也不会逃跑。 一个小男孩挣脱了妈妈,跑回了他的房间去找他的狗。 显然,狗狗也很害怕。 一个老妇人,一边哭一边被她儿子抱出了房子带到了公路上。 建在海和铁路之间的铁路保留区上的贫民窝棚 已经完全被冲走。 由于这是一个高危区域,警察曾警告过那些居民 所以水位上升的时候没人在那。 但是他们没有时间去抢救财物。 几个小时之后,数英里的海面上布满了木头的碎片 这些都来自于贫民窝棚。 当潮水平息之后,一切似乎从来没有发生过。
This may seem hard to believe -- unless you've been reading lots and lots of news reports -- but in many places, after the tsunami, villagers were still terrified. When what was a tranquil sea swallows up people, homes and long-tail boats -- mercilessly, without warning -- and no one can tell you anything reliable about whether another one is coming, I'm not sure you'd want to calm down either. One of the scariest things about the tsunami that I've not seen mentioned is the complete lack of information. This may seem minor, but it is terrifying to hear rumor after rumor after rumor that another tidal wave, bigger than the last, will be coming at exactly 1 p.m., or perhaps tonight, or perhaps ... You don't even know if it is safe to go back down to the water, to catch a boat to the hospital. We think that Phi Phi hospital was destroyed. We think this boat is going to Phuket hospital, but if it's too dangerous to land at its pier, then perhaps it will go to Krabi instead, which is more protected. We don't think another wave is coming right away.
这可能听起来难以置信, 除非你已经读过了许许多多这样的新闻报道 但是在很多地方,海啸之后,村民们仍然感觉恐惧。 当曾经平静的海面开始无情并毫无警告的吞没人们,家园 和那些长尾船时, 对于下一个海啸是不是会来,没有人能够给你可靠的消息, 我不确定你想要冷静下来。 海啸最令人害怕的东西之一 是信息的极度缺乏。 这似乎是小事,但听到一个接着一个的谣言,让人感到极度恐惧, 这些谣言说下一次海啸会比上一次更大, 会在下午1点来,或者是今晚,或者是。。。 你根本不知道回到水里搭船去医院 是不是安全。 我们认为Phi Phi医院已经被毁了。 我们认为这艘船将要去的是普吉医院, 但是如果在码头靠岸太危险的话, 也许就会去Krabi医院,一个更安全的地方。 我们并不认为下一次波浪马上就会来。
At the Phi Phi Hill Resort, I was tucked into the corner furthest away from the television, but I strained to listen for information. They reported that there was an 8.5 magnitude earthquake in Sumatra, which triggered the massive tsunami. Having this news was comforting in some small way to understand what had just happened to us. However, the report focused on what had already occurred and offered no information on what to expect now. In general, everything was merely hearsay and rumor, and not a single person I spoke to for over 36 hours knew anything with any certainty. Those were two accounts of the Asian tsunami from two Internet blogs that essentially sprang up after it occurred. I'm now going to show you two video segments from the tsunami that also were shown on blogs. I should warn you, they're pretty powerful. One from Thailand, and the second one from Phuket as well.
在Phi Phi山度假村, 我被挤到了离电视机最远的角落里, 但是我一直在强迫自己听这些消息。 他们报道说在苏门答腊发生了8.5级的地震, 触发了这次大海啸。 听到这则消息稍稍有点安慰, 至少明白了刚才究竟发生了什么。 然而,报道更多关注的是那些已经发生的 并没有提供任何有关于还会发生什么的信息。 大体上说,所有的都仅仅是道听途说或是谣言, 在过去的36个小时中,我说过话的人中,没有一个人 确定的知道些什么。 这是两篇从互络博客中选出的有关亚洲海啸的的博文 而这些博客也是在海啸发生之后如雨后春笋般冒出来。 我将要给你们看了两个有关海啸的视频片段 而他们也是来自于博客。 我必须提醒你们,这些视频很有冲击力。 一个来自于泰国,第二个来自于普吉,
(Screaming)
(尖叫声)
Voice 1: It's coming in. It's coming again.
声音1:它进来了。它又回来了。
Voice 2: It's coming again?
声音2:它又回来了?
Voice 1: Yeah. It's coming again.
声音1:是的。它又回来了。
Voice 2: Come get inside here.
声音2:[不明]
Voice 1: It's coming again. Voice 2: New wave? Voice 1: It's coming again. New wave! [Unclear]
声音1:它又回来了。新潮水。 它又回来了。 [不明]
(Screaming)
(尖叫声)
They called me out here.
他们叫我从这出去。
James Surowiecki: Phew. Those were both on this site: waveofdestruction.org. In the world of blogs, there's going to be before the tsunami and after the tsunami, because one of the things that happened in the wake of the tsunami was that, although initially -- that is, in that first day -- there was actually a kind of dearth of live reporting, there was a dearth of live video and some people complained about this. They said, "The blogsters let us down." What became very clear was that, within a few days, the outpouring of information was immense, and we got a complete and powerful picture of what had happened in a way that we never had been able to get before. And what you had was a group of essentially unorganized, unconnected writers, video bloggers, etc., who were able to come up with a collective portrait of a disaster that gave us a much better sense of what it was like to actually be there than the mainstream media could give us.
(叹气)这些视频都来自于这个网址:Waveofdestruction.org。 在博客世界里,这些将在海啸之前以及海啸之后发生, 因为在海啸刚刚发生之时,有一个事情是这样的, 虽然是最开始 - 或者说,就在第一天 - 现场报道实际上在某种程度上说是十分缺乏的,现场视频也是十分缺乏的 - 并且一些人还因此抱怨。 他们说,博客作者让我们失望了。 很清楚的是, 过了几天,输出的信息量是巨大的, 而且我们获得了一个完整并且冲击力十足的,有关于所发生事件的全景画面 以一种我们以往不可能获得的方式表达出来。 一群根本上无组织,无联系 的作者,视频博主,以及其他人 对海啸灾难进行了全面的描述,他们让我们得到了比主流媒体 更多的信息,让我们得到了亲历现场的感受。
And so in some ways the tsunami can be seen as a sort of seminal moment, a moment in which the blogosphere came, to a certain degree, of age. Now, I'm going to move now from this kind of -- the sublime in the traditional sense of the word, that is to say, awe-inspiring, terrifying -- to the somewhat more mundane. Because when we think about blogs, I think for most of us who are concerned about them, we're primarily concerned with things like politics, technology, etc. And I want to ask three questions in this talk, in the 10 minutes that remain, about the blogosphere. The first one is, What does it tell us about our ideas, about what motivates people to do things? The second is, Do blogs genuinely have the possibility of accessing a kind of collective intelligence that has previously remained, for the most part, untapped? And then the third part is, What are the potential problems, or the dark side of blogs as we know them?
从一些方面来看,这次海啸能够看成一次创新性的时刻, 一个博客世界达到某种境界的时刻。 现在,我们将移开现在这种 传统语义下的高尚 - 也就是说非常好,激动人心 - 来到世俗世界。 我们在思考博客的时候, 我想对于大多数关心他们的人, 我们主要关注的是政治,科技以及其他, 这样,我想要在剩下的10分钟的演讲里 问3个有关于博客世界的问题。 第一个问题是,关于我们的观念它究竟告诉了我们些什么, 是什么驱使着人们去做事情? 第二个问题是,博客真正有这样的可能性 能够获取一种之前从未被开发出来的 集体的智慧? 第三部分是,潜在的问题是什么, 或者说博客的黑暗面是什么?
OK, the first question: What do they tell us about why people do things? One of the fascinating things about the blogosphere specifically, and, of course, the Internet more generally -- and it's going to seem like a very obvious point, but I think it is an important one to think about -- is that the people who are generating these enormous reams of content every day, who are spending enormous amounts of time organizing, linking, commenting on the substance of the Internet, are doing so primarily for free. They are not getting paid for it in any way other than in the attention and, to some extent, the reputational capital that they gain from doing a good job. And this is -- at least, to a traditional economist -- somewhat remarkable, because the traditional account of economic man would say that, basically, you do things for a concrete reward, primarily financial. But instead, what we're finding on the Internet -- and one of the great geniuses of it -- is that people have found a way to work together without any money involved at all. They have come up with, in a sense, a different method for organizing activity.
好,第一个问题: 对于人们为什么做事情,它们告诉了我们什么? 博客世界令人着迷的事情中一个 或者说互联网中 - 看起来十分显而易见, 但是我认为这是一个十分重要需要思考的事情 是- 这些创造这些无数内容的人们 每天都在花无数的时间来整理 链接,评论存在于互联网上的事物, 并且绝大部分都是免费在做这个事情。 他们不会获得报酬,除了受到关注, 还有自己做得出色所得到的名声资本。 对于传统的经济学家来说,这些都是了不起的事情, 因为老派的经济学人会说, 你知道,基本上,你做事情是为了获得实在的奖励,而绝大部分是金钱奖励。 与之对比的是,我们在互联网上发现的 - 并且其中最伟大之处是 - 人们找到了某种方法 完全不为了钱而在一起工作。 他们找到了一种,不同的活动组织办法。
The Yale Law professor Yochai Benkler, in an essay called "Coase's Penguin," talks about this open-source model, which we're familiar with from Linux, as being potentially applicable in a whole host of situations. And, you know, if you think about this with the tsunami, what you have is essentially a kind of an army of local journalists, who are producing enormous amounts of material for no reason other than to tell their stories. That's a very powerful idea, and it's a very powerful reality. And it's one that offers really interesting possibilities for organizing a whole host of activities down the road.
来自于耶鲁法学院的Yochai Benkler教授在一篇论文中称这个为“科斯的企鹅,” 关于这个的讲话,一种我们从Linux上熟悉的开源模型, 在各种情况下都有被应用的可能。 并且,你知道,如果你仔细想想这一次海啸, 你所拥有基本上是无数的“基层记者” 他们制作着巨量的材料 为的是讲述他们的故事而不是为了钱 那是一个非常棒的主意,并且它有很强的现实操作性。 并且它是一个能够创造很多有趣的可能性的方法 在未来来组织很多活动。
So, I think the first thing that the blogosphere tells us is that we need to expand our idea of what counts as rational, and we need to expand our simple equation of value equals money, or, you have to pay for it to be good, but that in fact you can end up with collectively really brilliant products without any money at all changing hands. There are a few bloggers -- somewhere maybe around 20, now -- who do, in fact, make some kind of money, and a few who are actually trying to make a full-time living out of it, but the vast majority of them are doing it because they love it or they love the attention, or whatever it is. So, Howard Rheingold has written a lot about this and, I think, is writing about this more, but this notion of voluntary cooperation is an incredibly powerful one, and one worth thinking about.
所以,我认为博客世界告诉我们的第一件事就是 我们需要扩展我们所认为的理性世界, 并且我们需要扩展我们简单的将价值等同于金钱的等式, 或者说,你需要付钱才能得到好的这样的想法, 但是,实际上你能获得非常棒的集体创造的产品 而不需要付任何的钱。 当然有少数博客作者 - 可能大约20, 到目前为止 - 实际上,他们能够赚一些钱,非常有限 有一些人实际上想要通过这一方式来谋生, 但是绝大部分人之所以做这件事情仅仅是因为他们热爱它 或者说他们喜欢得到关注,或者其他。 所以,霍华德 宁柯德曾写过很多有关这个的东西, 并且我认为写这个会更多, 但是这一种自愿性合作的理念 有种无可比拟的力量,它值得每个人为之思考。
The second question is, What does the blogosphere actually do for us, in terms of accessing collective intelligence? You know, as Chris mentioned, I wrote a book called "The Wisdom of Crowds." And the premise of "The Wisdom of Crowds" is that, under the right conditions, groups can be remarkably intelligent. And they can actually often be smarter than even the smartest person within them. The simplest example of this is if you ask a group of people to do something like guess how many jellybeans are in a jar. If I had a jar of jellybeans and I asked you all to guess how many jellybeans were in that jar, your average guess would be remarkably good. It would be somewhere probably within three and five percent of the number of beans in the jar, and it would be better than 90 to 95 percent of you. There may be one or two of you who are brilliant jelly bean guessers, but for the most part the group's guess would be better than just about all of you. And what's fascinating is that you can see this phenomenon at work in many more complicated situations.
第二个问题是,从获取集体性智慧这一方面来说, 博客世界究竟为我们做了什么? 你们可能知道,克里斯也曾提到的,我写过一本叫做“人群的智慧”书。 而“人群的智慧”的前提是, 在正确的情形下,团体能够充分发挥聪明才智。 并且实际上大多数时候他们比 他们之中最聪明的人更加聪明。 这个最简单的例子就是如果你叫一群人 去做些事,比如,猜瓶子里有多少粒软糖。 如果我有一罐软糖, 并且我要你猜罐子里有多少颗糖, 你一般的猜测都会非常不错。 一般来说它只到 在罐子里糖的数量的3%到5%, 而这一答案会比你们中90%到95%人的答案准确。 你们中可能有一两个出色的软糖猜谜人, 但是绝大部分团体的猜测 都会比所有的个人的猜测准确。 这个现象最令人着迷的是,你能在很多复杂情况 的工作中看到这一现象。
For instance, if you look at the odds on horses at a racetrack, they predict almost perfectly how likely a horse is to win. In a sense, the group of betters at the racetrack is forecasting the future, in probabilistic terms. You know, if you think about something like Google, which essentially is relying on the collective intelligence of the Web to seek out those sites that have the most valuable information -- we know that Google does an exceptionally good job of doing that, and it does that because, collectively, this disorganized thing we call the "World Wide Web" actually has a remarkable order, or a remarkable intelligence in it. And this, I think, is one of the real promises of the blogosphere.
所以,比如说,如果你看看猜跑道上赛马的赔率, 他们能够几乎完美的预测出一匹马赢的概率。 在一定程度上,赛马行业的一群精英 以概率的方式,预测着未来。 你知道,如果我考虑某些比如像Google一样的东西, 这些主要依靠集体智慧的网站 来寻找所拥有的宝贵的信息的网站。 我们都知道对于那样的工作,Google能够出色的完成, 它之所以能够做到,是因为这一杂乱无序,我们叫做世界互联网的东西 实际上在整体上有着很清楚的次序, 或者可以说着惊人的智慧。 这,我认为,正是博客世界的真正希望之一。
Dan Gillmor -- whose book "We the Media" is included in the gift pack -- has talked about it as saying that, as a writer, he's recognized that his readers know more than he does. And this is a very challenging idea. It's a very challenging idea to mainstream media. It's a very challenging idea to anyone who has invested an enormous amount of time and expertise, and who has a lot of energy invested in the notion that he or she knows better than everyone else. But what the blogosphere offers is the possibility of getting at the kind of collective, distributive intelligence that is out there, and that we know is available to us if we can just figure out a way of accessing it. Each blog post, each blog commentary may not, in and of itself, be exactly what we're looking for, but collectively the judgment of those people posting, those people linking, more often than not is going to give you a very interesting and enormously valuable picture of what's going on. So, that's the positive side of it. That's the positive side of what is sometimes called participatory journalism or citizen journalism, etc. -- that, in fact, we are giving people who have never been able to talk before a voice, and we're able to access information that has always been there but has essentially gone untapped.
Dan Gillmor写了一本书叫做“我们媒体”-- 我们在礼物包中有提供-- 谈到了他作为一个作家 发现他的读者比他知道得更多。 而这是一个十分有挑战性的观点。非常非常有挑战性 特别是对主流媒体来说。这也是一个对于任何花费了无数时间,拥有专业技能的人 十分有挑战性的观点 同样也是对那些花费了很多精力形成一个观点, 认为自己比其他人知道的更多的人的一种挑战。 但是博客世界提供的是一种 能够获得存在于世间集体的,分散性智慧的可能性, 我们知道,它能够为我所用 如果我们能够找到获得它的途径。 每一条博客主题,每一则博客评论, 可能并不是跟我们所需要的东西一模一样, 但是这些人所张贴主题中所反射出的集体判断力,这些人链接, 更有可能给你一个对于所发生事情 十分有趣的并且相当有价值的视野。 所以,这是它积极的一面。 而这一积极的一面经常被称为 参与式新闻或者公民新闻,等等, 实际上,我们都是那一类人 在同一种声音前无法发声, 并且我们能够获取那些始终存在 但是基本上从未被涉及到的信息。
But there is a dark side to this, and that's what I want to spend the last part of my talk on. One of the things that happens if you spend a lot of time on the Internet, and you spend a lot of time thinking about the Internet, is that it is very easy to fall in love with the Internet. It is very easy to fall in love with the decentralized, bottom-up structure of the Internet. It is very easy to think that networks are necessarily good things -- that being linked from one place to another, that being tightly linked in a group, is a very good thing. And much of the time it is. But there's also a downside to this -- a kind of dark side, in fact -- and that is that the more tightly linked we've become to each other, the harder it is for each of us to remain independent.
但是它同样也有黑暗的一面, 而这正是我最后一部分演讲将要涉及的地方。 如果你花很多时间在互联网上,或者花很多时间思考互联网 有一种事情将会发生 你将会爱上互联网。 非常容易你将会爱上去中心化, 从下到上建构的互联网。 同样你也能够很容易想到互联网一定就是好的, 它们从一个地方链接到另外地方, 与集体紧密相连,是非常好的一件事。 在大多数情况都是这样。 但是这同样也有不好的一面 - 实际上,黑暗的一面 - 当我们更加紧密的连接在一起的时候, 我们要保持各自的独立性就更难。
One of the fundamental characteristics of a network is that, once you are linked in the network, the network starts to shape your views and starts to shape your interactions with everybody else. That's one of the things that defines what a network is. A network is not just the product of its component parts. It is something more than that. It is, as Steven Johnson has talked about, an emergent phenomenon. Now, this has all these benefits: it's very beneficial in terms of the efficiency of communicating information; it gives you access to a whole host of people; it allows people to coordinate their activities in very good ways. But the problem is that groups are only smart when the people in them are as independent as possible. This is the paradox of the wisdom of crowds, or the paradox of collective intelligence, that what it requires is actually a form of independent thinking. And networks make it harder for people to do that, because they drive attention to the things that the network values.
网络最基本的一个特征是 只要你连上了网络 网络就会开始塑造你的观点 并且同时开始塑造你与他人的互动。 而这正是定义什么是网络的因素之一。 网络并不是简单的是组成它的部分的集合。 更多时候它会比这更多。 正如Stieve Johnson谈过的一样,这是一个很新鲜的现象。 现在,它有这么一些优点: 对于有效的信息沟通,它是十分有益的; 它能使你接触到各种各样的人; 它能够让人们以一种好的方式协调他们的活动。 但是问题是,集体,只有在人们 尽可能独立的情况下才能显现出智慧。 只是一种群众智慧的矛盾, 或者说是集体智慧的矛盾, 它所真正需要的是一种独立的思想。 而网络使人们更难做到那一点, 因为他们使更多的注意力转到了网络所重视的地方。
So, one of the phenomena that's very clear in the blogosphere is that once a meme, once an idea gets going, it is very easy for people to just sort of pile on, because other people have, say, a link. People have linked to it, and so other people in turn link to it, etc., etc. And that phenomenon of piling on the existing links is one that is characteristic of the blogosphere, particularly of the political blogosphere, and it is one that essentially throws off this beautiful, decentralized, bottom-up intelligence that blogs can manifest in the right conditions.
所以,在博客世界中一个非常清楚的现象是 一旦一个文化基因,一个想法,开始发展 人们非常容易继续发展它, 因为其他人都拥有,比如说,相互连接。 一些人开始与之有连接,然后其他人开始轮流与之有连接,然后又是其他人。。。 这是一种 在已经存在的连接上继续延伸的现象 而它真是博客世界的特征, 特别是政治博客世界的特征, 而这从根本上来说是一种抛弃 一种对去中心化,自下而上美丽智慧的抛弃 而这一智慧真是博客在正常情况下必然能够展现的。
The metaphor that I like to use is the metaphor of the circular mill. A lot of people talk about ants. You know, this is a conference inspired by nature. When we talk about bottom-up, decentralized phenomena, the ant colony is the classic metaphor, because, no individual ant knows what it's doing, but collectively ants are able to reach incredibly intelligent decisions. They're able to reach food as efficiently as possible, they're able to guide their traffic with remarkable speed. So, the ant colony is a great model: you have all these little parts that collectively add up to a great thing. But we know that occasionally ants go astray, and what happens is that, if army ants are wandering around and they get lost, they start to follow a simple rule -- just do what the ant in front of you does. And what happens is that the ants eventually end up in a circle. And there's this famous example of one that was 1,200 feet long and lasted for two days, and the ants just kept marching around and around in a circle until they died. And that, I think, is a sort of thing to watch out for. That's the thing we have to fear -- is that we're just going to keep marching around and around until we die.
我在这想用转圆圈来打比方。 很多人会说到蚂蚁。 我们都知道,这是一个被自然启发而生的会议。 当我们讨论这些自下而上,去中心化的现象时, 蚁巢就是这一类的经典比喻,因为我们知道, 每一个单独的蚂蚁并不知道它们在做什么, 但是通过集体,蚂蚁们能够做出惊人的智慧决策。 它们能够以惊人的高速引导他们的交通。 所以,蚁巢是一个非常好的模型 - 我们所有的这些小部件最终能够组成一个伟大的东西。 但是我们也知道蚂蚁偶尔也会迷路, 这样的情况是,如果兵蚁在绕圈并且失去了方向感, 他们将会遵循一条简单原则 - 他们将做它们前面蚂蚁做的同样事情。 所以最终蚂蚁将会走出一个圆圈。 这其中最著名的一个例子走出了一千二百英尺长的距离 持续了两天,这些蚂蚁不停的绕圈前进 一直绕圈直到他们死掉。 我认为,那是一种我们必须要警惕的事情。 如果我们一直绕圈直到我们死去 这将是一种我们必须要畏惧的事情。
Now, I want to connect this back, though, to the tsunami, because one of the great things about the tsunami -- in terms of the blogosphere's coverage, not in terms of the tsunami itself -- is that it really did represent a genuine bottom-up phenomenon. You saw sites that had never existed before getting huge amounts of traffic. You saw people being able to offer up their independent points of view in a way that they hadn't before. There, you really did see the intelligence of the Web manifest itself. So, that's the upside. The circular mill is the downside. And I think that the former is what we really need to strive for.
现在,我想要将这个例子往回延伸,到我们的海啸上, 因为关于海啸有件很好的事, 在博客世界报道海啸方面, 不是海啸本身, 就是它确实代表了一种真实的自下而上的现象。 你会发现很多以前从未存在的网站会得到巨大访问量。 你会发现人们能够提供他们独立的见解和视角 以他们从未有过的方式提供。 并且我们能够真正从中看到网络展现了它的智慧。 所以,那正是积极的一面。而循环的绕圈则是它消极的一面。 并且我认为前一种情况正是我们需要不断努力来不断获得的。
Thank you very much. (Applause)
谢谢。