I study the future of crime and terrorism, and frankly, I'm afraid. I'm afraid by what I see. I sincerely want to believe that technology can bring us the techno-utopia that we've been promised, but, you see, I've spent a career in law enforcement, and that's informed my perspective on things. I've been a street police officer, an undercover investigator, a counter-terrorism strategist, and I've worked in more than 70 countries around the world. I've had to see more than my fair share of violence and the darker underbelly of society, and that's informed my opinions. My work with criminals and terrorists has actually been highly educational. They have taught me a lot, and I'd like to be able to share some of these observations with you.
我研究犯罪與恐怖主義 未來的發展 坦白說,我蠻害怕的 我看到的將來,讓我很擔心 我真心希望 科技能帶我們到 科技烏托邦的願景 但,這麼說吧 我一生都在執法單位 讓我發展出相關看法 我做過基層警員 也做過臥底調查員 參與反恐策略的規劃 我曾在70幾個國家做過相關工作 遍佈全世界 我見識夠多 暴力,以及陰暗的社會下層 我的看法因之成形 和罪犯及恐怖份子交手的經驗 非常有教育性 我學到許多,在此讓我和大家分享 我的部分觀察
Today I'm going to show you the flip side of all those technologies that we marvel at, the ones that we love. In the hands of the TED community, these are awesome tools which will bring about great change for our world, but in the hands of suicide bombers, the future can look quite different.
今天,我要和各位分享,讓我們嘖嘖稱奇的科技 也有我們意料不到的另一面 一樣是我們喜愛的科技 在TED 社區成員手裡 它們都是很棒的工具 可以給世界帶來很大改變 但在自殺炸彈客手中 卻會讓我們的將來卻完全走樣
I started observing technology and how criminals were using it as a young patrol officer. In those days, this was the height of technology. Laugh though you will, all the drug dealers and gang members with whom I dealt had one of these long before any police officer I knew did.
當我年輕時,還是在街上值勤的基層警員時 我就開始觀察罪犯們如何運用科技 幫助他們犯罪 那時,這些就是最好的科技產品 當然你會笑 但我碰過的藥頭和幫派份子 卻是人手一機 比所有我認識的警察都要早
Twenty years later, criminals are still using mobile phones, but they're also building their own mobile phone networks, like this one, which has been deployed in all 31 states of Mexico by the narcos. They have a national encrypted radio communications system. Think about that. Think about the innovation that went into that. Think about the infrastructure to build it. And then think about this: Why can't I get a cell phone signal in San Francisco? (Laughter) How is this possible? (Laughter) It makes no sense. (Applause)
二十年後,罪犯們 還是用手機,但他們也已經建構了 專屬的私人行動電話網路 就像各位在此看到的這些 在墨西哥全國31省都有,全由毒梟打造建構 他們的無線通訊系統 及於全國,所有通訊全部加密 想想 想想所需的創新科技 想想要這需要多龐大基層結構 然後再想想: 為什麼在我的手機在舊金山還有訊號的死角 (笑聲) 這怎麼搞的?(笑聲)一點道理都沒有(掌聲)
We consistently underestimate what criminals and terrorists can do. Technology has made our world increasingly open, and for the most part, that's great, but all of this openness may have unintended consequences.
我們一直都低估 罪犯和恐怖份子的能力 科技讓我們的世界 越來越開放,大致來說 這是好事,但我們的的開放 也帶來意想不到的後果
Consider the 2008 terrorist attack on Mumbai. The men that carried that attack out were armed with AK-47s, explosives and hand grenades. They threw these hand grenades at innocent people as they sat eating in cafes and waited to catch trains on their way home from work. But heavy artillery is nothing new in terrorist operations. Guns and bombs are nothing new. What was different this time is the way that the terrorists used modern information communications technologies to locate additional victims and slaughter them. They were armed with mobile phones. They had BlackBerries. They had access to satellite imagery. They had satellite phones, and they even had night vision goggles. But perhaps their greatest innovation was this. We've all seen pictures like this on television and in the news. This is an operations center. And the terrorists built their very own op center across the border in Pakistan, where they monitored the BBC, al Jazeera, CNN and Indian local stations. They also monitored the Internet and social media to monitor the progress of their attacks and how many people they had killed. They did all of this in real time.
想想2008年發生於孟買的恐怖攻擊 恐怖份子配備有 AK47步槍,炸藥,以及手榴彈 他們把手榴彈 扔到餐廳吃東西的無辜民眾群中 扔到等火車回家的乘客們當中 恐怖行動裡用重軍火並不稀奇 槍枝和炸彈已屢見不鮮 為什麼這一次不一樣 因為恐怖份子使用 現代資訊傳訊科技 幫他們找出更多的受害者,殺害他們 他們都帶了手機 他們用黑梅機 他們能透過衛星接收照片 他們用衛星電話,甚至用夜視鏡 但他們最厲害的創新是這個: 我們都看過這樣的相片 在電視上,新聞報導裡。這是行動中控中心 恐怖份子也建構自己的中控中心 設在邊界的另一端,巴基斯坦 在那裡監視BBC的新聞 半島電台,CNN,還有印度當地的廣播 他們也監視網際網路,以及社會媒體 掌控他們攻擊的進展 統計他們殺害的人數 全部都是即時掌控
The innovation of the terrorist operations center gave terrorists unparalleled situational awareness and tactical advantage over the police and over the government. What did they do with this? They used it to great effect.
恐怖份子使用行動中控中心這項創新 讓他們對事件當場的狀況精準掌握 享有遠優於警方,政府的戰術優勢 這前所未見 他們怎麼用這些科技呢? 非常有效果。
At one point during the 60-hour siege, the terrorists were going room to room trying to find additional victims. They came upon a suite on the top floor of the hotel, and they kicked down the door and they found a man hiding by his bed. And they said to him, "Who are you, and what are you doing here?" And the man replied, "I'm just an innocent schoolteacher." Of course, the terrorists knew that no Indian schoolteacher stays at a suite in the Taj. They picked up his identification, and they phoned his name in to the terrorist war room, where the terrorist war room Googled him, and found a picture and called their operatives on the ground and said, "Your hostage, is he heavyset? Is he bald in front? Does he wear glasses?" "Yes, yes, yes," came the answers. The op center had found him and they had a match. He was not a schoolteacher. He was the second-wealthiest businessman in India, and after discovering this information, the terrorist war room gave the order to the terrorists on the ground in Mumbai. ("Kill him.")
在60小時僵持中,有一度 恐怖份子逐房搜索 要找更多的受害者 他們到了旅館頂樓的一間套房 破門而入 找到一個躲在床邊的男人 他們問他: "你是誰 你到這裡做什麼?" 這人回答, "我只是個無辜的老師" 當然,這些恐怖份子知道 印度的老師不可能住的起Taj的頂樓套房 他們拿他的身份證件 打電話到他們的中控中心通報這男子的名字 中控中心的人用Google搜索 找到一張照片,然後回電給 在旅館的恐怖份子,問他: "你抓的人,是不是胖胖的, 前額微禿?他戴眼鏡嗎?" 他回答:"是,對,有" 中控中心知道他是誰了 他不是老師 他是印度第二富有的商人 有了這項消息後 中控中心下令 對在孟買現場的恐怖份子下令 ("把他殺了")
We all worry about our privacy settings on Facebook, but the fact of the matter is, our openness can be used against us. Terrorists are doing this. A search engine can determine who shall live and who shall die. This is the world that we live in.
我們對我們在臉書上 隱私權設定都非常在意 但這裡的問題在 我們的開放,可以被人拿來對付我們 恐怖份子就這麼幹 搜索引擎可以決定 我們的生死 這就是我們世界的現實
During the Mumbai siege, terrorists were so dependent on technology that several witnesses reported that as the terrorists were shooting hostages with one hand, they were checking their mobile phone messages in the very other hand. In the end, 300 people were gravely wounded and over 172 men, women and children lost their lives that day.
在孟買事件裡 恐怖份子非常依賴科技 幾個目擊者描述 這些恐怖份子一手用槍殺人 另一手拿著手機 檢查收到的訊息 最後,300人重傷 超過172人,男的,女的,小孩 喪失了生命
Think about what happened. During this 60-hour siege on Mumbai, 10 men armed not just with weapons, but with technology, were able to bring a city of 20 million people to a standstill. Ten people brought 20 million people to a standstill, and this traveled around the world. This is what radicals can do with openness.
想想 在孟買的60個凶險小時 10個人,配備了不只是武器 還配備了科技 能夠把一個2千萬人口的城市 陷入停滯 10個人,讓2千萬人 完全停滯,全世界都看到了 激進份子這般利用我們的開放
This was done nearly four years ago. What could terrorists do today with the technologies available that we have? What will they do tomorrow? The ability of one to affect many is scaling exponentially, and it's scaling for good and it's scaling for evil.
這是將近四年前發生的事 今天的恐怖份子 又會如何利用最新的科技呢? 他們明天會怎麼做? 一個人能影響許多人 這種影響能力正以等比級數方式增加 不管是好事,或是壞事,都一樣
It's not just about terrorism, though. There's also been a big paradigm shift in crime. You see, you can now commit more crime as well. In the old days, it was a knife and a gun. Then criminals moved to robbing trains. You could rob 200 people on a train, a great innovation. Moving forward, the Internet allowed things to scale even more. In fact, many of you will remember the recent Sony PlayStation hack. In that incident, over 100 million people were robbed. Think about that. When in the history of humanity has it ever been possible for one person to rob 100 million?
這也不光只限於恐怖主義 犯罪模式也產生變化 犯罪規模也變大了 過去,我們用刀用槍 然後發展到搶火車 能一次搶火車上200名乘客,這是一大創新 繼續到今日,有了網際網路 規模變的更大 其實,你們大都記得 最近發生的索尼PlayStation被駭事件 超過1億的人被搶了 想想 人類歷史上 什麼時候有過這種事 一個人搶1億個人?
Of course, it's not just about stealing things. There are other avenues of technology that criminals can exploit. Many of you will remember this super cute video from the last TED, but not all quadcopter swarms are so nice and cute. They don't all have drumsticks. Some can be armed with HD cameras and do countersurveillance on protesters, or, as in this little bit of movie magic, quadcopters can be loaded with firearms and automatic weapons. Little robots are cute when they play music to you. When they swarm and chase you down the block to shoot you, a little bit less so.
當然,也不全只是偷東西 還有其他科技 罪犯們可以運用 你們大都記上次TED大會時 有段超Q的影片 但並非所有四螺旋槳直昇機都這麼和善,這麼可愛 有些配備的可不是打鼓棒 有些可以配備高解析度(HD)攝影機 對抗議的人做反情搜 或者如這段影片顯示的 有些可配備槍械 自動武器 會播放音樂的小機器人很可愛 但當它們蜂擁而至,追著你在街上跑 對你射擊,就不那麼可愛了
Of course, criminals and terrorists weren't the first to give guns to robots. We know where that started. But they're adapting quickly. Recently, the FBI arrested an al Qaeda affiliate in the United States, who was planning on using these remote-controlled drone aircraft to fly C4 explosives into government buildings in the United States. By the way, these travel at over 600 miles an hour.
當然,罪犯和恐怖主義份子沒有發明在機器人上裝置武器 我們都知道誰是始作俑者 但他們學的很快 最近,聯邦調查局(FBI)在美國逮捕了 一個凱達組織成員 他計畫用這些遙控模型飛機 裝上C4塑膠炸藥 攻擊美國的政府辦公大樓 對了,這些飛機時速高達每小時600英里
Every time a new technology is being introduced, criminals are there to exploit it. We've all seen 3D printers. We know with them that you can print in many materials ranging from plastic to chocolate to metal and even concrete. With great precision I actually was able to make this just the other day, a very cute little ducky. But I wonder to myself, for those people that strap bombs to their chests and blow themselves up, how might they use 3D printers?
每當任何新科技發明了 罪犯就想運用它們 我們都看過3D列印裝置 用這些裝置 配上不同材料,包括塑膠 巧克力,金屬,甚至混凝土 只要夠精細 我真的做出了這玩意 幾天前剛做的,非常可愛的小鴨 但我進一步想 對那些把炸彈綁在胸前 把自己炸死的炸彈客 他們會怎麼運用這些3D列表機
Perhaps like this. You see, if you can print in metal, you can print one of these, and in fact you can also print one of these too. The UK I know has some very strict firearms laws. You needn't bring the gun into the UK anymore. You just bring the 3D printer and print the gun while you're here, and, of course, the magazines for your bullets.
也許做這玩意 看吧,只要能用金屬原料 你就可以印出這個 其實 你也可以印出這個東西 英國的槍械管制法很嚴密 你不需要帶枝槍到英國 只要帶3D列印機 在英國當地印製即可 當然,也可以印製彈匣
But as these get bigger in the future, what other items will you be able to print? The technologies are allowing bigger printers.
將來,這些裝置越來越大 他們可能會印製些什麼? 科技發展讓3D列印機越來越大
As we move forward, we'll see new technologies also, like the Internet of Things. Every day we're connecting more and more of our lives to the Internet, which means that the Internet of Things will soon be the Internet of Things To Be Hacked. All of the physical objects in our space are being transformed into information technologies, and that has a radical implication for our security, because more connections to more devices means more vulnerabilities. Criminals understand this. Terrorists understand this. Hackers understand this. If you control the code, you control the world. This is the future that awaits us.
我們還在進步 一直會有更新的科技,就像在網路上的發展 每天都有新東西讓 我們的生活和網際網路連結更緊密 這也就是說,這些網際網路的發明 很快也會被「駭」 我們生活周遭的具體事物 都被轉化成為資訊科技 這對我們的安全有非常不同的意涵 因為我們連結的東西越多 代表越多的弱點 罪犯們懂 恐怖主義份子懂。駭客也懂 只要控制程式,你就控制世界 這是我們的將來
There has not yet been an operating system or a technology that hasn't been hacked. That's troubling, since the human body itself is now becoming an information technology. As we've seen here, we're transforming ourselves into cyborgs. Every year, thousands of cochlear implants, diabetic pumps, pacemakers and defibrillators are being implanted in people. In the United States, there are 60,000 people who have a pacemaker that connects to the Internet. The defibrillators allow a physician at a distance to give a shock to a heart in case a patient needs it. But if you don't need it, and somebody else gives you the shock, it's not a good thing.
任何科技,任何作業系統 沒有不被「駭」過的 這讓人煩惱,因為人的身體 也變成了資訊科技 就像這裡顯示的,我們把自己一步一步變成了生化機器人 每年都有數以千計的人把內耳助聽器 胰島素幫浦,心律調整器 以及心律復甦電擊器,植入身體 在美國,有6萬人裝有和網路相連的 心律調整器 必要時,醫生可以在遠端 用這些電擊復甦器 電擊人們的心臟 但假如你不需要電擊 但有人卻故意電擊你呢? 這可不妙
Of course, we're going to go even deeper than the human body. We're going down to the cellular level these days. Up until this point, all the technologies I've been talking about have been silicon-based, ones and zeroes, but there's another operating system out there: the original operating system, DNA. And to hackers, DNA is just another operating system waiting to be hacked. It's a great challenge for them. There are people already working on hacking the software of life, and while most of them are doing this to great good and to help us all, some won't be.
當然,我們越來越深入人體 最近,我們還進到了人體細胞的層次 一直到現在為止,我討論的 都是有關電子科技,0與1 但還有另一種作業系統 人類原來的作業系統,DNA 對駭客而言,DNA只是另一個作業系統 等著他們「駭」 對他們是不小的挑戰 已經有人在研究如何「駭」入生命的程式 雖然大部分的研究都是為了人類好 幫助全人類 但有些可不
So how will criminals abuse this? Well, with synthetic biology you can do some pretty neat things. For example, I predict that we will move away from a plant-based narcotics world to a synthetic one. Why do you need the plants anymore? You can just take the DNA code from marijuana or poppies or coca leaves and cut and past that gene and put it into yeast, and you can take those yeast and make them make the cocaine for you, or the marijuana, or any other drug. So how we use yeast in the future is going to be really interesting. In fact, we may have some really interesting bread and beer as we go into this next century.
那罪犯們會如何濫用這些? 用合成生物方法,可以做出相當厲害的的東西 舉例來說,我預測我們將不再依賴 以植物做出的麻醉藥品 而改用人工合成。那你還需要植物幹啥? 你只要把大麻的DNA序列 或罌粟花,可可葉的DNA 只要複製這些基因 放到酵母裡 你就可以用這些酵母 做出古柯鹼 大麻,或其他毒品 所以,將來人們如何使用酵母 會非常有趣 其實,我們已有些很不一樣的麵包,啤酒 當我們步入21世紀
The cost of sequencing the human genome is dropping precipitously. It was proceeding at Moore's Law pace, but then in 2008, something changed. The technologies got better, and now DNA sequencing is proceeding at a pace five times that of Moore's Law. That has significant implications for us.
人類基因排序的成本大幅滑落 過去進展的速度和半導體業的摩爾定律預測的一樣快 但在2008,發生了改變 科技變的更好 現在DNA排序解讀的速度 正以摩爾定律的五倍速度進行 這對我們有很重要的影響
It took us 30 years to get from the introduction of the personal computer to the level of cybercrime we have today, but looking at how biology is proceeding so rapidly, and knowing criminals and terrorists as I do, we may get there a lot faster with biocrime in the future. It will be easy for anybody to go ahead and print their own bio-virus, enhanced versions of ebola or anthrax, weaponized flu.
自個人電腦發明 到今天的網路犯罪 走了30年 但生物科技進展這麼快速 根據我對罪犯及恐怖份子的了解 我們走到將來生物犯罪 的速度要快的多 將來任何人都可以 隨意製造他們發明的生物病毒 更進階的依波拉病毒,炭疽病毒 把流感變成武器
We recently saw a case where some researchers made the H5N1 avian influenza virus more potent. It already has a 70 percent mortality rate if you get it, but it's hard to get. Engineers, by moving around a small number of genetic changes, were able to weaponize it and make it much more easy for human beings to catch, so that not thousands of people would die, but tens of millions. You see, you can go ahead and create new pandemics, and the researchers who did this were so proud of their accomplishments, they wanted to publish it openly so that everybody could see this and get access to this information.
最近,我們也看到有研究人員 合成了更有殺傷力的H5N1的禽流感病毒 可以造成7成的死亡率 只要你能拿到。當然,這不容易拿到。 工程師只要小規模地 操弄改變基因 就可以把它們變成武器 讓這些病毒更容易為人感染 這樣就不只是幾千人的傷亡 而是幾千萬人的傷亡了 所以,你可以製造新的瘟疫 這些研究人員 對他們的成就感到很驕傲 他們想要把他們的研究公開 讓大眾都可以看到 也可以接觸這些研究資料
But it goes deeper than that. DNA researcher Andrew Hessel has pointed out quite rightly that if you can use cancer treatments, modern cancer treatments, to go after one cell while leaving all the other cells around it intact, then you can also go after any one person's cell. Personalized cancer treatments are the flip side of personalized bioweapons, which means you can attack any one individual, including all the people in this picture. How will we protect them in the future?
但現在已經又更進一步了 研究DNA的專家,安得魯 黑賽爾 也很有理由地指出了 只要能以治療癌症的方法 現代癌症治療方法 只針對特定細胞,而不影響這細胞 周邊的其他細胞 當然你也可以針對任何特定人士的細胞 讓癌症治療「個人化」 是「個人化的生化武器」的對立面 意味你可以攻擊任意個人 包括這相片中的每一個人 你在未來要怎麼保護顯要人物?
What to do? What to do about all this? That's what I get asked all the time. For those of you who follow me on Twitter, I will be tweeting out the answer later on today. (Laughter)
怎麼辦呀?該怎麼辦? 一直都有人問我這個問題 假如你有用推特 我今天稍晚會把答案發在推特上。 (笑聲)
Actually, it's a bit more complex than that, and there are no magic bullets. I don't have all the answers, but I know a few things. In the wake of 9/11, the best security minds put together all their innovation and this is what they created for security. If you're expecting the people who built this to protect you from the coming robopocalypse — (Laughter) — uh, you may want to have a backup plan. (Laughter) Just saying. Just think about that. (Applause)
其實,這也沒那麼簡單 也沒有特效藥 我不是萬事通,對所有事情都有解 但我知道 9/11發生後 最棒的維安專家 把他們所想到的創意兜在一起 搞出了這種維安系統 假如你想靠弄出這套系統的這些「專家」保護你 來逃過未來「機器人滅亡人類」的慘劇 -- (笑聲) -- 嗯,你或許該準備個逃命備案 (笑聲) 我只是說說罷了。你們可以想想。 (掌聲)
Law enforcement is currently a closed system. It's nation-based, while the threat is international. Policing doesn't scale globally. At least, it hasn't, and our current system of guns, border guards, big gates and fences are outdated in the new world into which we're moving. So how might we prepare for some of these specific threats, like attacking a president or a prime minister? This would be the natural government response, to hide away all our government leaders in hermetically sealed bubbles. But this is not going to work. The cost of doing a DNA sequence is going to be trivial. Anybody will have it and we will all have them in the future.
執法機關目前還是封閉體系 以國家為單位,但安全的威脅是全球性的 警察運作沒全球化,至少,目前還沒有。 既有體系中的武器,巡邊員,關卡,以及藩籬 在我們即將進入的新世界中都落伍了 那我們該如何應付這些威脅? 像是針對單一總統,首相的攻擊? 政府的自然反應會把 所有的政府領袖全藏起來 藏在封閉的與世隔離的泡泡中 但這沒用 DNA序列解碼的成本越來越低 任何人都負擔的起DNA序列解碼,每個人未來都有自己的DNA碼
So maybe there's a more radical way that we can look at this. What happens if we were to take the President's DNA, or a king or queen's, and put it out to a group of a few hundred trusted researchers so they could study that DNA and do penetration testing against it as a means of helping our leaders? Or what if we sent it out to a few thousand? Or, controversially, and not without its risks, what happens if we just gave it to the whole public? Then we could all be engaged in helping.
那也許我們可以用更極端的方法來處理這問題 假如我們把 總統的 DNA 或哪個國王或女王的DNA, 提供給幾百個 我們信任的研究人員,讓他們 研究,並做之實驗各項攻擊的可能 作為幫助我們保護領袖的方法,這會怎樣? 或者,如果我們把DNA發給幾千個研究人員? 或許,不管爭議多大,風險多大 我們把DNA公布給大眾會怎樣? 那我們都可以動手幫忙囉
We've already seen examples of this working well. The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project is staffed by journalists and citizens where they are crowd-sourcing what dictators and terrorists are doing with public funds around the world, and, in a more dramatic case, we've seen in Mexico, a country that has been racked by 50,000 narcotics-related murders in the past six years. They're killing so many people they can't even afford to bury them all in anything but these unmarked graves like this one outside of Ciudad Juarez. What can we do about this? The government has proven ineffective. So in Mexico, citizens, at great risk to themselves, are fighting back to build an effective solution. They're crowd-mapping the activities of the drug dealers.
這樣作,很成功的例子也有 「組織犯罪及貪腐報告計畫」 成員包括記者和公民 他們藉由群眾提供的情報 揭露全球獨裁者和恐怖份子 如何濫用公共資金 有一個更具戲劇性的例子, 墨西哥在過去6年間 受五萬件和毒品 有關的謀殺案 荼毒。 他們殺死那麼多人 甚至來不及把死者好好安葬 好多人都被埋在亂葬岡成了無名墓 就像這些埋在蘇達 華芮茲外的墳場的這些墓 我們能做些什麼?連政府都已證明沒用。 墨西哥的公民們,冒著極大風險 展開反擊,建立一個有效的解決方案。 他們利用群眾找出毒販們的行蹤
Whether or not you realize it, we are at the dawn of a technological arms race, an arms race between people who are using technology for good and those who are using it for ill. The threat is serious, and the time to prepare for it is now. I can assure you that the terrorists and criminals are.
不管你是否意識到, 我們處於了科技軍備競賽的初期階段 這場軍備競賽的兩方 一邊想用科技做好事 一邊則是要用科技行惡 我們面對嚴重威脅,此時正該戮力準備 我向你保證,恐怖分子和罪犯們也正在準備
My personal belief is that, rather than having a small, elite force of highly trained government agents here to protect us all, we're much better off having average and ordinary citizens approaching this problem as a group and seeing what we can do. If we all do our part, I think we'll be in a much better space. The tools to change the world are in everybody's hands. How we use them is not just up to me, it's up to all of us.
我個人認為 與其部署為數不多,訓練有素 的政府菁英武力 來保護我們 不如 由我們一般公民 一起來面對處理這個問題 找出我們能做的事 假如我們都盡一分力 我相信我們的處境會更好 改變世界的工具 在我們每個人的手上。 我們怎麼用這些工具,不是我一個人說了算 我們一起說了才算
This was a technology I would frequently deploy as a police officer. This technology has become outdated in our current world. It doesn't scale, it doesn't work globally, and it surely doesn't work virtually.
這是一個老科技,我當警察時 經常使用 在當前的世界裡,這項科技已經過時了 無法大規模運用,也無法全球運用 在虛擬世界裡,更是沒用武之地
We've seen paradigm shifts in crime and terrorism. They call for a shift to a more open form and a more participatory form of law enforcement. So I invite you to join me. After all, public safety is too important to leave to the professionals.
我們已經看到罪犯,恐怖份子改變作案方式 我們需要更開放的形式 一種大眾都參與的執法方式 所以我邀請你與我攜手合作 畢竟,公共安全太重要了,光由專業人士來扛是不夠的
Thank you. (Applause)
謝謝。(掌聲)
(Applause)
(掌聲)