Let's talk about trust. We all know trust is fundamental, but when it comes to trusting people, something profound is happening.
讓我們來談談信任。 我們都知道信任是萬物之本, 但當談及人跟人之間的信任時, 有些意味深遠的事情便發生了。
Please raise your hand if you have ever been a host or a guest on Airbnb. Wow. That's a lot of you.
如果各位曾經是 Airbnb 的 房東或房客的話,請舉手。 哇!很多人。
Who owns Bitcoin? Still a lot of you. OK.
誰有比特幣? 也是非常多人!
And please raise your hand if you've ever used Tinder to help you find a mate.
那麼如果你曾使用 Tinder 幫助你找到對象的話,也請舉手。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
This one's really hard to count because you're kind of going like this.
真的很難算有幾個人, 因為好像你們手都舉得很低。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
These are all examples of how technology is creating new mechanisms that are enabling us to trust unknown people, companies and ideas. And yet at the same time, trust in institutions -- banks, governments and even churches -- is collapsing. So what's happening here, and who do you trust?
這些例子都顯示出科技創造的新機制 讓我們信任陌生的人、企業和想法。 與此同時, 對制度的信任, 對銀行、政府 甚至教會的信任正在瓦解。 所以,發生了什麼事? 你現在還信任誰?
Let's start in France with a platform -- with a company, I should say -- with a rather funny-sounding name, BlaBlaCar. It's a platform that matches drivers and passengers who want to share long-distance journeys together. The average ride taken is 320 kilometers. So it's a good idea to choose your fellow travelers wisely. Social profiles and reviews help people make a choice. You can see if someone's a smoker, you can see what kind of music they like, you can see if they're going to bring their dog along for the ride. But it turns out that the key social identifier is how much you're going to talk in the car.
我們從法國的一個平台開始談。 這其實是一間名字聽起來 有點搞笑的公司, 叫做「BlaBlaCar」。 這個平台 為想要一起分享長途旅行的 司機和乘客進行配對。 已經完成的路途平均 320 公里。 所以大家最好明智地選擇旅伴。 社交媒體帳戶簡介和評論 幫助人們做選擇。 你可以知道他是否抽菸, 你可以知道他喜歡的音樂類型, 你可以知道他們會否帶著愛犬出遊。 但其實最關鍵的社會標識符 卻是你在車裡會說多少話。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Bla, not a lot, bla bla, you want a nice bit of chitchat, and bla bla bla, you're not going to stop talking the entire way from London to Paris.
Bla 代表話不多, Bla Bla 表示你們想來點閒聊, Bla bla Bla 則表示倫敦到巴黎的 整段路程你們都沒完沒了的聊。 (笑聲)
(Laughter)
It's remarkable, right, that this idea works at all, because it's counter to the lesson most of us were taught as a child: never get in a car with a stranger. And yet, BlaBlaCar transports more than four million people every single month. To put that in context, that's more passengers than the Eurostar or JetBlue airlines carry. BlaBlaCar is a beautiful illustration of how technology is enabling millions of people across the world to take a trust leap.
這個想法竟然奏效,實在出人意表, 因為它違反我們當中大部分 自小被教導的道理: 永遠不要進到陌生人的車裡。 然而 BlaBlaCar 的每月載客量 已經超過四百萬人。 具體地說,這比歐洲之星 和捷藍航空的載客量還多。 BlaBlaCar 絕佳體現出 科技如何讓全球數百萬人 改弦易轍互相信任。
A trust leap happens when we take the risk to do something new or different to the way that we've always done it. Let's try to visualize this together. OK. I want you to close your eyes. There is a man staring at me with his eyes wide open. I'm on this big red circle. I can see. So close your eyes.
信任大躍進在於我們承擔風險, 做點全新或跟以前做法不同的事情。 讓我們一起想像這是甚麼回事。 我想請你們閉上眼睛。 那邊有個人張開眼睛看著我, 站在這紅色大圓圈上的我都看到了, 所以請你們閉上眼睛。
(Laughter) (Applause)
(笑聲)(拍手)
I'll do it with you. And I want you to imagine there exists a gap between you and something unknown. That unknown can be someone you've just met. It can be a place you've never been to. It can be something you've never tried before. You got it? OK. You can open your eyes now. For you to leap from a place of certainty, to take a chance on that someone or something unknown, you need a force to pull you over the gap, and that remarkable force is trust.
我會與你們一起想像。 我要你們想像和某個 不熟悉的事物之間有一條間隙。 這個不熟悉的事物可能是你剛遇到的人。 這可以是你不曾去過的地方。 這可以是你不曾嘗試過的事物。 這樣懂嗎? 好的,你們可以張開眼睛了。 要你們從明確的地方大跳躍出去, 嘗試跟不熟悉的人和事一起, 你需要一股力量 將你拉起越過那一條間隙, 而那股意想不到的力量就是信任。
Trust is an elusive concept, and yet we depend on it for our lives to function. I trust my children when they say they're going to turn the lights out at night. I trusted the pilot who flew me here to keep me safe. It's a word we use a lot, without always thinking about what it really means and how it works in different contexts of our lives.
信任是難以捉摸的概念, 但我們必須有信任才可活出人生。 當我的子女說會在晚上關燈時, 我信任他們。 我信任飛機機師安全地接載我過來。 我們經常用到這個詞語, 卻沒有常常思考它真正的涵義, 也沒有思考它如何 在人生的不同情境活出來。
There are, in fact, hundreds of definitions of trust, and most can be reduced to some kind of risk assessment of how likely it is that things will go right. But I don't like this definition of trust, because it makes trust sound rational and predictable, and it doesn't really get to the human essence of what it enables us to do and how it empowers us to connect with other people.
其實信任的定義數以百計, 當中大多數都可簡化為 某種對事情順利或然率的風險評估。 但我不喜歡這樣對信任所下的定義, 因為這使信任聽起來 理性且可以預測; 這樣的定義也捕捉不到人的本質, 捕捉不到信任可以讓我們做到的事, 以及信任如何讓我們能夠 與其他人聯繫起來。
So I define trust a little differently. I define trust as a confident relationship to the unknown. Now, when you view trust through this lens, it starts to explain why it has the unique capacity to enable us to cope with uncertainty, to place our faith in strangers, to keep moving forward.
因此我對信任所下的定義有些不同, 我把信任定義為與未知的事物 建立起充滿信心的關係。 當你透過這塊鏡片看待信任, 才能夠解釋 為何信任有一種特別的能力 讓我們應付不確定的事物, 讓我們信任陌生人, 讓我們持續往前走。
Human beings are remarkable at taking trust leaps. Do you remember the first time you put your credit card details into a website? That's a trust leap. I distinctly remember telling my dad that I wanted to buy a navy blue secondhand Peugeot on eBay, and he rightfully pointed out that the seller's name was "Invisible Wizard" and that this probably was not such a good idea.
人類進行信任大躍進時 表現非常出色。 你還記得第一次 將信用卡資料輸入到網站上嗎? 那就是信任大躍進。 我還清楚記得曾經告訴父親, 我想在 eBay 上買一台 海軍藍色的二手寶獅汽車, 我父親直接點出 賣家的名字叫做「隱形巫師」, 所以不應該跟他買車。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
So my work, my research focuses on how technology is transforming the social glue of society, trust between people, and it's a fascinating area to study, because there's still so much we do not know. For instance, do men and women trust differently in digital environments? Does the way we build trust face-to-face translate online? Does trust transfer? So if you trust finding a mate on Tinder, are you more likely to trust finding a ride on BlaBlaCar?
我專注研究科技如何轉變 社會凝聚力和人與人之間的信任, 這個研究領域非常地吸引人, 因為這領域還有很多 我們未知的事物。 譬如,數位環境中的信任感 是否存在男女之別? 我們面對面建立信任的方式 同樣適用在網路上嗎? 信任可以移轉嗎﹖ 如果你信任在 Tinder 上找到伴侶, 那麼會否更傾向信任 在 BlaBlaCar 上找到人共乘嗎?
But from studying hundreds of networks and marketplaces, there is a common pattern that people follow, and I call it "climbing the trust stack." Let me use BlaBlaCar as an example to bring it to life. On the first level, you have to trust the idea. So you have to trust the idea of ride-sharing is safe and worth trying. The second level is about having confidence in the platform, that BlaBlaCar will help you if something goes wrong. And the third level is about using little bits of information to decide whether the other person is trustworthy.
研究數百個網路和市場的結果顯示, 大家都會遵循一個共同模式, 我稱之為「爬上信任層疊」。 就讓我用 BlaBlaCar 作例子 去生動地形容這概念。 在第一個層次,你要信任這個想法。 你必須要信任 共乘這個想法是安全且值得一試。 第二個層次關乎對這個平台的信心, 相信 BlaBlaCar 會在 發生狀況時幫助你。 第三個層次是用一點一點的資訊 決定另一個人是否值得信任。
Now, the first time we climb the trust stack, it feels weird, even risky, but we get to a point where these ideas seem totally normal. Our behaviors transform, often relatively quickly. In other words, trust enables change and innovation.
當我們第一次爬上信任層疊, 我們覺得奇怪,甚至感到危險, 但我們最後都會相信 這些都是看似完全正常的想法。 我們的行為往往轉變得很快。 也就是說,信任促使改變和創新。
So an idea that intrigued me, and I'd like you to consider, is whether we can better understand major waves of disruption and change in individuals in society through the lens of trust. Well, it turns out that trust has only evolved in three significant chapters throughout the course of human history: local, institutional and what we're now entering, distributed.
我對某個想法很感興趣, 我也希望你們一起來思考: 我們可否透過信任這鏡片更清楚知道 個人和社會層面的主要轉折和轉變。 原來信任在整個人類歷史上 只有三個顯著的進化階段: 本地屬性、體制屬性, 以及我們即將進入的分配屬性階段。
So for a long time, until the mid-1800s, trust was built around tight-knit relationships. So say I lived in a village with the first five rows of this audience, and we all knew one another, and say I wanted to borrow money. The man who had his eyes wide open, he might lend it to me, and if I didn't pay him back, you'd all know I was dodgy. I would get a bad reputation, and you would refuse to do business with me in the future. Trust was mostly local and accountability-based.
在 19 世紀中葉前的 一段漫長時間, 信任是圍繞着緊密關係而建立。 假設我跟前五排的觀眾 一起住在村莊裡,彼此認識, 並假設我要借錢。 剛剛睜眼的先生可能會借錢給我, 如果我沒有還他錢, 大家都會知道我信不過, 我的名聲就臭掉了, 以後你也不會想要跟我做生意。 信任大都具有本地屬性, 以問責為基礎。
In the mid-19th century, society went through a tremendous amount of change. People moved to fast-growing cities such as London and San Francisco, and a local banker here was replaced by large corporations that didn't know us as individuals. We started to place our trust into black box systems of authority, things like legal contracts and regulation and insurance, and less trust directly in other people. Trust became institutional and commission-based.
在 19 世紀中葉, 社會經歷了巨大的轉變。 大家搬遷到倫敦或舊金山等 快速發展的城市, 在個人層次上不認識我們的大集團 取代了本地銀行家。 我們開始信任權力機關的黑箱體制, 例如法律合同、監管規則和保險, 較少直接信任其他人。 信任變成具有體制屬性, 以委託為基礎。
It's widely talked about how trust in institutions and many corporate brands has been steadily declining and continues to do so. I am constantly stunned by major breaches of trust: the News Corp phone hacking, the Volkswagen emissions scandal, the widespread abuse in the Catholic Church, the fact that only one measly banker went to jail after the great financial crisis, or more recently the Panama Papers that revealed how the rich can exploit offshore tax regimes. And the thing that really surprises me is why do leaders find it so hard to apologize, I mean sincerely apologize, when our trust is broken?
對體制及很多公司品牌的信任 眾所周知已經並將會持續下滑。 我經常對重大的 破壞信任行為感到驚訝: 新聞集團電話竊聽案; 福斯汽車廢氣排放醜聞; 鋪天蓋地的天主教教會性侵案; 巨大的金融危機後只有 一個卑鄙小銀行家入獄; 或者最近的巴拿馬文件 揭示富人如何利用離岸公司避稅。 使我感到無比驚訝的是, 當我們之間的信任被打破後, 為何領袖認為誠懇道歉是如此艱難﹖
It would be easy to conclude that institutional trust isn't working because we are fed up with the sheer audacity of dishonest elites, but what's happening now runs deeper than the rampant questioning of the size and structure of institutions. We're starting to realize that institutional trust wasn't designed for the digital age. Conventions of how trust is built, managed, lost and repaired -- in brands, leaders and entire systems -- is being turned upside down.
各位大可以總結, 對體制的信任失效, 是因為我們對不誠實精英的 恣意妄為忍無可忍, 但現在發生的事所涉及的層面, 並非不斷質疑 體制規模和結構所能觸及。 我們開始明白到, 對體制的信任不是為數位時代而設。 建立、經營、失去及修補 信任感的常規— 無論是對品牌、領袖 或整個體系的信任─正被顛覆。
Now, this is exciting, but it's frightening, because it forces many of us to have to rethink how trust is built and destroyed with our customers, with our employees, even our loved ones.
這令人既興奮也害怕, 因為這使我們重新思考 跟顧客、僱員甚至愛人的信任 是如何建立和摧毀。
The other day, I was talking to the CEO of a leading international hotel brand, and as is often the case, we got onto the topic of Airbnb. And he admitted to me that he was perplexed by their success. He was perplexed at how a company that depends on the willingness of strangers to trust one another could work so well across 191 countries. So I said to him that I had a confession to make, and he looked at me a bit strangely, and I said -- and I'm sure many of you do this as well -- I don't always bother to hang my towels up when I'm finished in the hotel, but I would never do this as a guest on Airbnb. And the reason why I would never do this as a guest on Airbnb is because guests know that they'll be rated by hosts, and that those ratings are likely to impact their ability to transact in the future. It's a simple illustration of how online trust will change our behaviors in the real world, make us more accountable in ways we cannot yet even imagine.
日前我與一間國際頂尖飯店品牌的 執行長對談, 正如一般情況, 我們聊到 Airbnb 這個話題。 他向我承認難以理解 Airbnb 的成功。 他難以理解 一間依靠陌生人願意互相信任的公司 竟可以在 191 個國家運作如此良好。 我跟他說我有事情要自白, 他就用很奇怪的眼光看著我, 然後我說— 我相信很多人都會這樣做─ 我在飯店用完毛巾都懶得掛起來, 但我身為 Airbnb 的顧客 卻永遠不會這樣做, 為什麼當 Airbnb 的顧客 永遠不會這樣做, 是因為顧客知道房東會給他們評分, 這些評分有可能影響到 他們日後能否進行交易。 這簡單的刻畫出線上的信任感 將會如何改變我們現實世界的行為, 使我們以從未想像過的方式 變得更有責任感。
I am not saying we do not need hotels or traditional forms of authority. But what we cannot deny is that the way trust flows through society is changing, and it's creating this big shift away from the 20th century that was defined by institutional trust towards the 21st century that will be fueled by distributed trust. Trust is no longer top-down. It's being unbundled and inverted. It's no longer opaque and linear. A new recipe for trust is emerging that once again is distributed amongst people and is accountability-based.
我並非要說我們不需要飯店 或是傳統形式的權威。 但我們無法否認, 信任在社會流通的方式已經改變了, 所創造出的巨大轉變, 就是由體制屬性信任 所界定的 20 世紀 轉變為分配屬性信任 所推動的 21 世紀。 信任的流向不再是由上往下。 它逐漸被鬆綁,流向也被倒轉過來。 它不再是模糊或呈線性。 構成信任的新方式逐漸形成, 其本質回歸到人際分配模式, 以問責為基礎。
And this shift is only going to accelerate with the emergence of the blockchain, the innovative ledger technology underpinning Bitcoin. Now let's be honest, getting our heads around the way blockchain works is mind-blowing. And one of the reasons why is it involves processing some pretty complicated concepts with terrible names. I mean, cryptographic algorithms and hash functions, and people called miners, who verify transactions -- all that was created by this mysterious person or persons called Satoshi Nakamoto. Now, that is a massive trust leap that hasn't happened yet.
隨着區塊鍊 這種支撐比特幣的分帳技術冒起, 轉變只會越來越快。 老實說,理解區塊鏈如何運作 可令人頭昏腦脹。 其中一個原因是當中包含的步驟 有很多非常複雜且名稱難懂的概念。 我說的是加密演算法和雜湊函數, 以及驗證交易、被稱為礦工的人, 這一切都是由一位或多位 稱作「中本聰」的神秘人物 所創造出來。 這才是從未發生過的 超大型信任大躍進。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
But let's try to imagine this. So "The Economist" eloquently described the blockchain as the great chain of being sure about things. The easiest way I can describe it is imagine the blocks as spreadsheets, and they are filled with assets. So that could be a property title. It could be a stock trade. It could be a creative asset, such as the rights to a song. Every time something moves from one place on the register to somewhere else, that asset transfer is time-stamped and publicly recorded on the blockchain. It's that simple. Right.
讓我們試著想像, 《經濟學人》意味深長地將區塊鍊技術 形容為「確保萬物的巨大鎖鏈」。 用最簡單的方式形容, 就是把區塊鏈想像成試算表, 每個格子填滿著資產。 這些資產可以是財產契據。 可以是股票交易。 可以是歌曲版權等創意資產。 每次資產 從記錄的一處移至另一處時, 資產移轉就會被標記時間, 在區塊鏈上被公開記錄下來。 就是這麼簡單的事情。
So the real implication of the blockchain is that it removes the need for any kind of third party, such as a lawyer, or a trusted intermediary, or maybe not a government intermediary to facilitate the exchange. So if we go back to the trust stack, you still have to trust the idea, you have to trust the platform, but you don't have to trust the other person in the traditional sense.
所以區塊鏈真正的意義 就是移除對任何第三方的需求。 例如律師和非政府授信的中介人, 讓交易更加方便。 讓我們回到信任層疊, 你還是要信任這樣的想法, 你也要信任這樣的平台, 但你不需要以傳統的方式信任別人。
The implications are huge. In the same way the internet blew open the doors to an age of information available to everyone, the blockchain will revolutionize trust on a global scale.
這意義巨大, 就像互聯網打開了 通往資訊共享世代的大門, 區塊鍊將會以全球規模 徹底改變信任感。
Now, I've waited to the end intentionally to mention Uber, because I recognize that it is a contentious and widely overused example, but in the context of a new era of trust, it's a great case study. Now, we will see cases of abuse of distributed trust. We've already seen this, and it can go horribly wrong. I am not surprised that we are seeing protests from taxi associations all around the world trying to get governments to ban Uber based on claims that it is unsafe. I happened to be in London the day that these protests took place, and I happened to notice a tweet from Matt Hancock, who is a British minister for business.
現在我等到快要結束 才打算談到 Uber, 因為我知道這是一個非常具爭議性 而且廣泛被過度使用的例子, 但當我們談論信任的新時代, 這就是很棒的個案。 我們會看到具分配屬性的信任 被濫用的個案。 我們已見識過,而且可以相當離譜。 我不驚訝於全球計程車協會抗議, 聲稱 Uber 不安全而要求政府取締它, 在抗議發生的那天,我剛好在倫敦, 剛好注意到由英國商務大臣 夏國賢發出的一條推特。
And he wrote, "Does anyone have details of this #Uber app everyone's talking about?
他寫道: 「有沒有人知道大家在談論的 #Uber 應用程式詳細資訊?
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
I'd never heard of it until today."
我到今天才知道耶。」
Now, the taxi associations, they legitimized the first layer of the trust stack. They legitimized the idea that they were trying to eliminate, and sign-ups increased by 850 percent in 24 hours. Now, this is a really strong illustration of how once a trust shift has happened around a behavior or an entire sector, you cannot reverse the story. Every day, five million people will take a trust leap and ride with Uber. In China, on Didi, the ride-sharing platform, 11 million rides taken every day. That's 127 rides per second, showing that this is a cross-cultural phenomenon.
現在計程車協會 合理化信任層疊的第一層。 他們合理化自己試圖要消滅的想法, Uber 的註冊人數 在 24 小時內增加了 8.5 倍。 這強而有力地證明 當圍繞一種行為 或是整個行業的信任移轉時, 情況就會無法逆轉。 每天有五百萬人 進行信任大躍進搭乘 Uber。 在中國,「滴滴出行」共乘平台 每天就錄得 1,100 萬次共乘。 即是每秒 127 次共乘, 顯示這是跨文化的現象。
And the fascinating thing is that both drivers and passengers report that seeing a name and seeing someone's photo and their rating makes them feel safer, and as you may have experienced, even behave a little more nicely in the taxi cab. Uber and Didi are early but powerful examples of how technology is creating trust between people in ways and on a scale never possible before.
最棒的是,司機和乘客都表示, 看到名字,看到別人的照片和評價, 讓他們覺得更加安心, 而大家可能也體驗過, 甚至比乘搭計程車時更有禮貌。 Uber 和滴滴出行 這些早期例子強而有力地展現, 科技如何以從來不可能的方式和規模 在人與人之間建立信任。
Today, many of us are comfortable getting into cars driven by strangers. We meet up with someone we swiped right to be matched with. We share our homes with people we do not know.
如今我們大部分人 對搭乘陌生人開的車感到自在。 我們跟向右輕掃後配對的人見面。 我們把自己的家分享給陌生人。
This is just the beginning, because the real disruption happening isn't technological. It's the trust shift it creates, and for my part, I want to help people understand this new era of trust so that we can get it right and we can embrace the opportunities to redesign systems that are more transparent, inclusive and accountable.
這只是起步而已, 因為正在發生的真正轉折 與科技無關。 而是跟它造成的信任移轉有關。 我就希望幫助人們 了解這新世代的信任感, 這樣我們才能把事情做的正確, 我們就能擁抱機遇,重新設計制度, 使它們更具透明度、廣納性和問責性。
Thank you very much.
非常感謝大家。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
Thank you.
謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)