Take a look at this picture. It poses a very fascinating puzzle for us. These African students are doing their homework under streetlights at the airport in the capital city because they don't have any electricity at home. Now, I haven't met these particular students, but I've met students like them.
请看这张图片。 它带给我们一个极具吸引力的谜。 这些非洲学生在做功课 在首都机场的街灯下 因为他们家里没有电。 我还没见过这几个学生本人 但我见过像他们一样的学生。
Let's just pick one -- for example, the one in the green shirt. Let's give him a name, too: Nelson. I'll bet Nelson has a cellphone. So here is the puzzle. Why is it that Nelson has access to a cutting-edge technology, like the cellphone, but doesn't have access to a 100-year-old technology for generating electric light in the home?
拿那个穿绿衬衫的学生做例子, 假设他的名字叫做Nelson。 我猜他肯定有个手机 有趣的是, 为什么Nelson有机会享用 像手机这样的前沿科技成果 但却不能在家用上电力? 人们早在100年前就已经发明了这一科技啊?
Now, in a word, the answer is "rules." Bad rules can prevent the kind of win-win solution that's available when people can bring new technologies in and make them available to someone like Nelson. What kinds of rules? The electric company in this nation operates under a rule, which says that it has to sell electricity at a very low, subsidized price -- in fact, a price that is so low it loses money on every unit that it sells. So it has neither the resources, nor the incentives, to hook up many other users.
答案是“制度”。 不健全的制度会 妨碍这种双赢节决办法的产生 (比如)人们在一定的制度之下就不会将科技带给像Nelson这样的人 什么样的制度呢? 这个国家的电力公司需要遵守一条制度 这个制度要求它 在政府补贴的条件下从用户收取极其低价电费 事实上,电费便宜到另电力公司亏损的地步 所以,电力公司既没有资源,也没有动机 去给用户接通电源
The president wanted to change this rule. He's seen that it's possible to have a different set of rules, rules where businesses earn a small profit, so they have an incentive to sign up more customers. That's the kind of rules that the cellphone company that Nelson purchases his telephony from operates under. The president has seen how those rules worked well. So he tried to change the rules for pricing on electricity, but ran into a firestorm of protest from businesses and consumers who wanted to preserve the existing subsidized rates. So he was stuck with rules that prevented him from letting the win-win solution help his country. And Nelson is stuck studying under the streetlights.
总统想要改变这个局面 他已经觉察到更换体制是具可能性的。 能让商家盈利的体制 才能使(商家)有动机争取更多用户 卖Nelson的手机的那个厂家 也正式在(让商家盈利)制度下经营着 总统已经领会到(让商家盈利的)制度运行良好 所以他尝试着改变现行的(补贴)电价制度 但来自商人以及消费者的 反对的声音四起 他们想保留现行的补贴电费制度 总统无能为力, 只能任由现行制度阻止双赢局面产生,任由它妨碍改善国家 因此,Nelson也只能在街灯下学习
The real challenge then, is to try to figure out how we can change rules. Are there some rules we can develop for changing rules? I want to argue that there is a general abstract insight that we can make practical, which is that, if we can give more choices to people, and more choices to leaders -- who, in many countries, are also people. (Laughter) But, it's useful to present the opposition between these two. Because the kind of choice you might want to give to a leader, a choice like giving the president the choice to raise prices on electricity, takes away a choice that people in the economy want. They want the choice to be able to continue consuming subsidized electric power. So if you give just to one side or the other, you'll have tension or friction. But if we can find ways to give more choices to both, that will give us a set of rules for changing rules that get us out of traps.
真正具有挑战性的是 尝试寻找改变制度的办法 我们可不可以发展“改变制度”的制度呢? 我想说, 我们可以把抽象化为实际 或者说,如果我们给予人民更多选择 给予领导者更多选择, 领导者在很多国家也是人民么 (笑) 但,(领袖和人民)两者间的对立还是有必要解释的 因为你想给予领袖的自由 是像那种你给予总统 提高电价(的权力)一样的自由 剥夺人民在这个经济体系中的需求自由 (人民)希望可以继续享用 补贴电价的自由 所以如果你只选取一方,或另一方 你将面临矛盾或摩擦 但如果我们相办法同时给两者自由 那么就会产生 能使我们摆脱困境的制度
Now, Nelson also has access to the Internet. And he says that if you want to see the damaging effects of rules, the ways that rules can keep people in the dark, look at the pictures from NASA of the earth at night. In particular check out Asia. If you zoom in here, you can see North Korea, in outline here, which is like a black hole compared to its neighbors. Now, you won't be surprised to learn that the rules in North Korea keep people there in the dark.
Nelson现在还可以享用互联网 他说如果你想看到 制度的破坏性 制度怎样陷人民于黑暗中 看一看美国家宇航局拍摄的地球夜景 特别注意一下亚洲 放大这里 可以看到北朝鲜,在这儿 比起它的邻居,北朝鲜就像个黑洞 你不会惊讶 北朝鲜的制度 将人民陷于黑暗
But it is important to recognize that North Korea and South Korea started out with identical sets of rules in both the sense of laws and regulations, but also in the deeper senses of understandings, norms, culture, values and beliefs. When they separated, they made choices that led to very divergent paths for their sets of rules. So we can change -- we as humans can change the rules that we use to interact with each other, for better, or for worse.
重要的是 要承认南北朝鲜 曾有一模一样的制度 不论法律上还是政策上 而且在深层理解上 准则,文化,价值,信仰 南北分隔时,南北朝鲜做出了 引领它们走向不同道路的选择 由不同的制度而产生 因而我们可以改变,我们,人类,可以改变制度 人际交往与相处的制度 使之变得更好,或更坏
Now let's look at another region, the Caribbean. Zoom in on Haiti, in outline here. Haiti is also dark, compared to its neighbor here, the Dominican Republic, which has about the same number of residents. Both of these countries are dark compared to Puerto Rico, which has half as many residents as either Haiti or the Dominican Republic. What Haiti warns us is that rules can be bad because governments are weak. It's not just that the rules are bad because the government is too strong and oppressive, as in North Korea. So that if we want to create environments with good rules, we can't just tear down. We've got to find ways to build up, as well.
现在来看看另外一个地区,加勒比海域 放大海地 (国名) 在这儿 海地也在黑暗中 和邻国多米尼加共和国相比 同样的人口总数 但这两个国家和波多黎各比,也处于黑暗中 波多黎各人口总数大概是 海地或多米尼亚共和国的一半左右 海地提醒了我们 体制可因薄弱的政府而不健全 而不完全是 因为政府太强制,比如北朝鲜 因此如果我们想要创建良好政策的环境 我们不能总是破坏 我们需要相办法建设
Now, China dramatically demonstrates both the potential and the challenges of working with rules. Back in the beginning of the data presented in this chart, China was the world's high-technology leader. Chinese had pioneered technologies like steel, printing, gunpowder. But the Chinese never adopted, at least in that period, effective rules for encouraging the spread of those ideas -- a profit motive that could have encouraged the spread. And they soon adopted rules which slowed down innovation and cut China off from the rest of the world. So as other countries in the world innovated, in the sense both of developing newer technologies, but also developing newer rules, the Chinese were cut off from those advances. Income there stayed stagnant, as it zoomed ahead in the rest of the world.
看,中国强烈地展示了 体制改革带来的 潜力和挑战 在这图表数据(被采集)的时期, 中国是世界高科技的前沿 例如钢铁,印刷,火药 但中国从未采用,至少那个时期 任何有效的措施来鼓励这些想法的传播 或者一个盈利的动机来鼓励传播 中国很快采用了 延缓创新的措施 然后与世界隔离,自闭门户 所以在其它国家创新时, 在发展 新科技 和新制度的层面上时 中国已经与这些进步脱离了脚步 国民收入停滞 成为了一个非常落后的国度
This next chart looks at more recent data. It plots income, average income in China as a percentage of average income in the United States. In the '50s and '60s you can see that it was hovering at about three percent. But then in the late '70s something changed. Growth took off in China. The Chinese started catching up very quickly with the United States.
这个图表展示较新的数据 它展示了收入,中国的平均收入 与之美国的平均收入百分比 五六十年代,你可以看到它徘徊在3%左右 但七十年代,情况变了 中国开始发展,开始迅速地 追赶上美国
If you go back to the map at night, you can get a clue to the process that lead to the dramatic change in rules in China. The brightest spot in China, which you can see on the edge of the outline here, is Hong Kong. Hong Kong was a small bit of China that, for most of the 20th century, operated under a very different set of rules than the rest of mainland China -- rules that were copied from working market economies of the time, and administered by the British.
如果你晚上看这个地图, 你会发现 导致中国体制急速变化的原因 中国最明亮的地域 你可以在轮廓的边际看到 是香港 香港其实是中国很小的一块地方 在二十世纪的绝大部分时期 都在非常不同的体制下治理着 与大陆其它地方都不同 体制是从 当时(英国)有效的市场经济复制出来的 并由英国治理
In the 1950s, Hong Kong was a place where millions of people could go, from the mainland, to start in jobs like sewing shirts, making toys. But, to get on a process of increasing income, increasing skills led to very rapid growth there. Hong Kong was also the model which leaders like Deng Xiaoping could copy, when they decided to move all of the mainland towards the market model.
于19世纪五十年代,香港是 百万大陆人 去找像缝纫,制作玩具之类工作的地方 但要想提高收入 提高技术 促进(经济)飞速增长 香港也是 像邓小平这样的领导者 想要使大陆走向市场经济时 要模仿的经济模型
But Deng Xiaoping instinctively understood the importance of offering choices to his people. So instead of forcing everyone in China to shift immediately to the market model, they proceeded by creating some special zones that could do, in a sense, what Britain did: make the opportunity to go work with the market rules available to the people who wanted to opt in there. So they created four special economic zones around Hong Kong: zones where Chinese could come and work, and cities grew up very rapidly there; also zones where foreign firms could come in and make things.
但邓小平本能地理解 给予人民自由的重要性 所以邓不是一下子放手让中国 立即走向市场经济 他先设立了特别行政区 这样就可以模仿英国 提供可以运行市场经济的机会 向那些想要这个机会的人们 所以他们创建了围绕香港的四个特殊经济开发区 中国人可以去那里工作 那里城市迅速发展 并且外商涌入 制造产品
One of the zones next to Hong Kong has a city called Shenzhen. In that city there is a Taiwanese firm that made the iPhone that many of you have, and they made it with labor from Chinese who moved there to Shenzhen. So after the four special zones, there were 14 coastal cites that were open in the same sense, and eventually demonstrated successes in these places that people could opt in to, that they flocked to because of the advantages they offered. Demonstrated successes there led to a consensus for a move toward the market model for the entire economy.
香港旁边有个地区叫深圳 深圳有个台湾公司 制造你们每人都有的iPhone 使用中国的劳动力 那些移民到深圳的劳工 所以在四个特别行政区以后 有14个滨海城市 向这样对外开放 最终成功 在这些人们选择移居的地方 其实人们是因为机遇和条件而蜂拥而至 这些(特别行政区)的成功引起共识 带领整个经济体制走向市场经济
Now the Chinese example shows us several points. One is: preserve choices for people. Two: operate on the right scale. If you try to change the rules in a village, you could do that, but a village would be too small to get the kinds of benefits you can get if you have millions of people all working under good rules. On the other hand, the nation is too big. If you try to change the rules in the nation, you can't give some people a chance to hold back, see how things turn out, and let others zoom ahead and try the new rules. But cities give you this opportunity to create new places, with new rules that people can opt in to. And they're large enough to get all of the benefits that we can have when millions of us work together under good rules.
现在中国的这些例子证明以下几点: 一:留给人民自由 二:在恰当的规模下操作 如果你想在一个村庄改变体制,可以, 但一个村的规模太小了 不能带给你如同让百万人一样的效应 在优质体制的治理下 另一方面,一下子改变全国的体制又太大了 如果你想改变国家体制 有一部分人必然得不到照顾 他们也没有机会去评估新政的优劣 (无法)给人民一个聚焦未来,尝试新体制的机会 但像城市就能给你这些机会 来创建新领域 开拓新体制,人们可以选择(尝试这个体制) 并且(城市这个规模)足够大 大到我们能得到应有的 当百万人在新体制治理下应有的效应
So the proposal is that we conceive of something called a charter city. We start with a charter that specifies all the rules required to attract the people who we'll need to build the city. We'll need to attract the investors who will build out the infrastructure -- the power system, the roads, the port, the airport, the buildings. You'll need to attract firms, who will come hire the people who move there first. And you'll need to attract families, the residents who will come and live there permanently, raise their children, get an education for their children, and get their first job.
所以我提议 我们设想一种叫做“特别市”的东西 首先(设立)纲领 详细说明所有的条例规则 来吸引那些建设特别市的人才 我们需要吸引投资商 他们会建设基础设施 (比如)能源系统,公路,码头,机场,楼房 你需要吸引商家 他们会来聘用最先移居特别市的人们 你需要吸引家庭 那些会来长期居住的人 抚养小孩,供他们受教育 开始他们的事业
With that charter, people will move there. The city can be built. And we can scale this model. We can go do it over and over again. To make it work, we need good rules. We've already discussed that. Those are captured in the charter. We also need the choices for people. That's really built into the model if we allow for the possibility of building cities on uninhabited land. You start from uninhabited territory. People can come live under the new charter, but no one is forced to live under it. The final thing we need are choices for leaders.
在这样的纲领下,人们会移居那里 城市才能建立起来 我们还可以改善这个模型的规模 我们可以一遍又一遍地(尝试) 要想成功,我们需要完善地体制。我们已经讨论过了 这些(体制)将在纲领中体现出来 我们还需要给人们自由去选择 (自由选择)是真正融入了这个模型(的精髓) 如果我们允许 在无人居住的土地上建设城市的话 你从荒芜的领地开始 人们可以移居那里开始新的纲领 但没有人是被迫的 最后,我们需要给领导者自由去选择
And, to achieve the kind of choices we want for leaders we need to allow for the potential for partnerships between nations: cases where nations work together, in effect, de facto, the way China and Britain worked together to build, first a little enclave of the market model, and then scale it throughout China. In a sense, Britain, inadvertently, through its actions in Hong Kong, did more to reduce world poverty than all the aid programs that we've undertaken in the last century. So if we allow for these kind of partnerships to replicate this again, we can get those kinds of benefits scaled throughout the world.
要做到给领导者自由 我们需要允许国家间的合作 让不同的国家可以合作 事实上 像中国和英国合作(于香港一例)一样 来首先建设一个市场经济的飞地 然后扩大至整个中国 或多或少,英国,不经意地 在上个世纪它治理香港期间 对削减世界贫困上做出了 比任何支援项目 都更为卓越的贡献 所以只要我们允许这样的合作 重演 我们可以将这个效应扩大的整个世界的规模
In some cases this will involve a delegation of responsibility, a delegation of control from one country to another to take over certain kinds of administrative responsibilities. Now, when I say that, some of you are starting to think, "Well, is this just bringing back colonialism?" It's not. But it's important to recognize that the kind of emotions that come up when we start to think about these things, can get in the way, can make us pull back, can shut down our ability, and our interest in trying to explore new ideas.
有时这需要委派职责 一种从一个国家到另外一个国家的责任的委派 来执行某些行政管理的职责 我这么说 你们中有些人可能开始想 “那,不是要恢复殖民主义吗?” 不是的。但是认识到这种情绪却是重要的 我们开始考虑这些时,这些情绪将产生 (这些情绪)会阻碍我们 扼杀我们的能力 (打击)我们探索新想法的兴趣
Why is this not like colonialism? The thing that was bad about colonialism, and the thing which is residually bad in some of our aid programs, is that it involved elements of coercion and condescension. This model is all about choices, both for leaders and for the people who will live in these new places. And, choice is the antidote to coercion and condescension.
为什么这不是殖民主义? 殖民主义的弊病 以及支援项目遗留的弊端是 它具有 强迫和屈尊的元素 但(我提议的这个)模型的核心是自由选择 无论是对领导者来说,还是对来移居的人民来说 这自由选择恰恰正是强迫和屈尊的解药
So let's talk about how this could play out in practice. Let's take a particular leader, Raul Castro, who is the leader of Cuba. It must have occurred to Castro that he has the chance to do for Cuba what Deng Xiaoping did for China, but he doesn't have a Hong Kong there on the island in Cuba. He does, though, have a little bit of light down in the south that has a very special status. There is a zone there, around Guantanamo Bay, where a treaty gives the United States administrative responsibility for a piece of land that's about twice the size of Manhattan.
那么我们来谈谈怎样实际操作 拿卡斯特罗来说——他是古巴的领袖做例子 卡斯特罗一定意识到 他有机会对古巴 采用像邓小平对中国一样的政策 但古巴这个岛国没有像香港一样的地方 南方倒有一处明亮的地方 具有非常特殊的意义 在关塔那摩湾区域 一个条约给予美国 行政管理的权力 对这足有曼哈顿两倍大小的地方
Castro goes to the prime minister of Canada and says, "Look, the Yankees have a terrible PR problem. They want to get out. Why don't you, Canada, take over? Build -- run a special administrative zone. Allow a new city to be built up there. Allow many people to come in. Let us have a Hong Kong nearby. Some of my citizens will move into that city as well. Others will hold back. But this will be the gateway that will connect the modern economy and the modern world to my country."
卡斯特罗对加拿大总理说 “看,美国佬在公共关系上有问题 他们要退出了 你为什么不接手呢? 管理一个特别的行政区 让新城市建设在那里 让人们住进来 让我们附近有一个像香港一样的城市 我的公民会移居那里 也有人不会。但这将 成为会连通现代经济和现代世界 的门户 对我的国家来说。”
Now, where else might this model be tried? Well, Africa. I've talked with leaders in Africa. Many of them totally get the notion of a special zone that people can opt into as a rule. It's a rule for changing rules. It's a way to create new rules, and let people opt-in without coercion, and the opposition that coercion can force. They also totally get the idea that in some instances they can make more credible promises to long-term investors -- the kind of investors who will come build the port, build the roads, in a new city --
现在,还有哪里尝试过这个模型? 非洲。我曾和非洲的领导者沟通过 他们很多人都完全理解特别行政区的含义 人们可以选择体制 这是个为改变体制而建立的体制 这是个创建新制度,让人民选择的办法 没有压迫,也没有可以去压迫的反抗 (非洲领导者)也完全理解在某些情况下 他们可以向长期投资商做出更由权威的承诺 那些将会修建码头的投资商 修建公路,在新城市
they can make more credible promises if they do it along with a partner nation. Perhaps even in some arrangement that's a little bit like an escrow account, where you put land in the escrow account and the partner nation takes responsibility for it. There is also lots of land in Africa where new cities could be built. This is a picture I took when I was flying along the coast. There are immense stretches of land like this -- land where hundreds of millions of people could live. Now, if we generalize this and think about not just one or two charter cites, but dozens -- cities that will help create places for the many hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of people who will move to cities in the coming century --
他们可以做出更有信服力的承诺 如果他们与另外一个国家合作 甚至在某些安排中, 这有点像代管账户 你把地产投入代管账户 合作国从而负责管理这个账户 非洲还有很多地 新城市可以建设在这些地上 这张照片是我在海湾上空拍摄的 像这样的广阔的地有很多 成百上千的人可以居住 让我们概括并思考 不是一两个,而是几十个特别市 能提供 上百万,或许上亿人 在下个世纪移居到特别市
is there enough land for them? Well, throughout the world, if we look at the lights at night, the one thing that's misleading is that, visually, it looks like most of the world is already built out. So let me show you why that's wrong. Take this representation of all of the land. Turn it into a square that stands for all the arable land on Earth. And let these dots represent the land that's already taken up by the cities that three billion people now live in. If you move the dots down to the bottom of the rectangle you can see that the cities for the existing three billion urban residents take up only three percent of the arable land on earth.
我们有足够大的地吗? 远看世界,如果我们夜里寻找明亮 误导人的是 肉眼看来,貌似绝大部分已经建设好了 让我来告诉你为什么这是错误的 这代表所有的地面 把它转换成方形来代表 地球上所有可耕种的土地 这些点代表已经被占用了的土地 现在有30亿人居住在城市里 如果你把这些点移动倒长方形的底端 你发现已经住有30亿城镇居民的城市 只占用了地球上3%可耕种土地
So if we wanted to build cities for another billion people, they would be dots like this. We'd go from three percent of the arable land, to four percent. We'd dramatically reduce the human footprint on Earth by building more cities that people can move to. And if these are cities governed by good rules, they can be cities where people are safe from crime, safe from disease and bad sanitation, where people have a chance to get a job. They can get basic utilities like electricity. Their kids can get an education.
如果我们想再建设些城市来容纳10亿居民 他们会像这些点一样 我们从占用3%可耕种土地到占用4% 通过建设城市,并且让住在农村的人可以移居城市 我们将急剧减少人类在地球上的足迹 如果这些城市在完善的体制下治理 他们可以成为人们 远离犯罪、疾病以及低劣的卫生条件 人们可以找工作 可以有起码的公共服务,比如用电 孩子可以受教育
So what will it take to get started building the first charter cities, scaling this so we build many more? It would help to have a manual. (Laughter) What university professors could do is write some details that might go into this manual. You wouldn't want to let us run the cities, go out and design them. You wouldn't let academics out in the wild. (Laughter)
我们需要什么来开始(这个工程)呢? 开始建设第一批特别市 然后扩大规模,建设更多? 有一个“用户使用指南”还是很有必要的 (笑) 大学教授能做到的 是写一些可以被写入指南的细节 你或许不让我们治理这些城市 出去设计它们 你或许不让学者走出象牙塔
But, you could set us to work thinking about questions like, suppose it isn't just Canada that does the deal with Raul Castro. Perhaps Brazil comes in as a participant, and Spain as well. And perhaps Cuba wants to be one of the partners in a four-way joint venture. How would we write the treaty to do that? There is less precedent for that, but that could easily be worked out.
但你可以让我们来考虑这些问题 假设这不仅是加拿大 和卡斯特罗的交易 也许巴西也来凑热闹 还有西班牙。也许古巴想要 成为四边合作的一员 我们怎么来起草协议呢? 没有前者为例。但要解决也很轻松
How would we finance this? Turns out Singapore and Hong Kong are cities that made huge gains on the value of the land that they owned when they got started. You could use the gains on the value of the land to pay for things like the police, the courts, but the school system and the health care system too, which make this a more attractive place to live, makes this a place where people have higher incomes -- which, incidentally, makes the land more valuable. So the incentives for the people helping to construct this zone and build it, and set up the basic rules, go very much in the right direction.
我们怎么融资? 事实上新加坡和香港 还有其它 在地产增值时捞上一大笔的一些城市 你可以用地产的盈利来支付 像警察,法院之类的设施 还有教育和医疗系统 让它成为让人向往居住的地方 让它成为高收入的地方 这样也会使得地产增值更高 所以 对这些建设这区域,设立基础纲领的人的奖励 是完全合适的
So there are many other details like this. How could we have buildings that are low cost and affordable for people who work in a first job, assembling something like an iPhone, but make those buildings energy efficient, and make sure that they are safe, so they don't fall down in an earthquake or a hurricane. Many technical details to be worked out, but those of us who are already starting to pursue these things can already tell that there is no roadblock, there's no impediment, other than a failure of imagination, that will keep us from delivering on a truly global win-win solution.
还有很多像这样的细节 我们怎样才能给那些靠组装iPhone的工人 像那样的一类人群 如何为他们提供他们有能力买得起的楼房? 而且要让这楼房节能 安全,不能塌下来 比如说在地震或飓风的时候 很多细节还要再疏理 我们中间有些人已经在追逐这样的梦了 他们可以告诉你, 没有办不到的,只有想不到的 只有匮乏的想像力会阻碍我们 发掘出可以带来真正的全球双赢的方案
Let me conclude with this picture. The reason we can be so well off, even though there is so many people on earth, is because of the power of ideas. We can share ideas with other people, and when they discover them, they share with us. It's not like scarce objects, where sharing means we each get less. When we share ideas we all get more. When we think about ideas in that way, we usually think about technologies.
让我们总结一下 为什么我们可以过着富裕的生活 尽管地球上这么多人 因为主意的力量 我们可以与人分享想法 当他们有好的主意,他们也和我们分享 这与稀有物质不同 (稀有物质)分享意味着每人得到少一些 但我们分享我们的想法时,我们都得到更多 如果我们这么谈起想法 通常会想到科技
But there is another class of ideas: the rules that govern how we interact with each other; rules like, let's have a tax system that supports a research university that gives away certain kinds of knowledge for free. Let's have a system where we have ownership of land that is registered in a government office, that people can pledge as collateral.
但想法也有另外一层含义 那就是我们怎样彼此交流的规则 像让我们有一个税收系统 来支持一个科研性大学 来免费传授某个知识这样的规则 让我们有一个系统允许我们拥有 在政府注册了的土地 人们可以拿做抵押
If we can keep innovating on our space of rules, and particularly innovate in the sense of coming up with rules for changing rules, so we don't get stuck with bad rules, then we can keep moving progress forward and truly make the world a better place, so that people like Nelson and his friends don't have to study any longer under the streetlights. Thank you. (Applause)
如果我们坚持在规则上创新 特别是 在改变规则的规则上创新 这样我们就不会被不健全的制度禁锢 这样我们就可以朝前进步 真正让世界更美好 这样像Nelson和他的朋友们这样的孩子 就不必在街灯下学习了。谢谢。 (掌声)