This is my first time at TED. Normally, as an advertising man, I actually speak at TED Evil, which is TED's secret sister that pays all the bills. It's held every two years in Burma. And I particularly remember a really good speech by Kim Jong Il on how to get teens smoking again. (Laughter)
這是我第一次來到TED。通常,作為一個廣告人, 我在TED Evil(邪惡TED)演講,這是TED的秘密姐妹組織-- 為所有費用買單。 TED Evil每兩年在緬甸舉行一次。 有一場非常精彩的演講尤其令我印象深刻。 金正日(Kim Jong II)談論如何能讓青少年再度吸煙。 (笑)
But, actually, it's suddenly come to me after years working in the business, that what we create in advertising, which is intangible value -- you might call it perceived value, you might call it badge value, subjective value, intangible value of some kind -- gets rather a bad rap. If you think about it, if you want to live in a world in the future where there are fewer material goods, you basically have two choices. You can either live in a world which is poorer, which people in general don't like. Or you can live in a world where actually intangible value constitutes a greater part of overall value, that actually intangible value, in many ways is a very, very fine substitute for using up labor or limited resources in the creation of things.
但實際上,在廣告界工作多年後,我突然發現, 我們在廣告中創造的是, 無形價值--也可以叫作感知價值, 或者標識價值,主觀價值, 某種形式的無形價值-- 時常得到負面評價。 設想一下,如果將來你想生活在 物質相對缺乏的世界,基本上你有兩個選擇。 你可以生活在相對貧窮的世界, 一般人都不喜歡這個選擇。 或者,你可以生活在無形價值構成 總體價值很大比重的世界, 事實上,無形價值在很多方面 能很好地替代 有限的人力或資源 用來創造產品。
Here is one example. This is a train which goes from London to Paris. The question was given to a bunch of engineers, about 15 years ago, "How do we make the journey to Paris better?" And they came up with a very good engineering solution, which was to spend six billion pounds building completely new tracks from London to the coast, and knocking about 40 minutes off a three-and-half-hour journey time. Now, call me Mister Picky. I'm just an ad man ... ... but it strikes me as a slightly unimaginative way of improving a train journey merely to make it shorter. Now what is the hedonic opportunity cost on spending six billion pounds on those railway tracks?
這裏有個例子。這是一輛從倫敦開往巴黎的火車。 15年前,工程師們遇到一個問題, “如何能改善倫敦至巴黎之旅” 他們想出了一個非常好的工程解決方案, 即花費60億英鎊 在倫敦和蔚藍海岸之間 建造全新的軌道, 使三個半小時的旅程減少40分鐘。 現在,大家可以叫我挑剔先生。我只是個廣告人... 但依我看,作為改善火車之旅的方法,這不免有些缺乏想像力 如果僅僅是縮短行程的話。 那麼花費60億建造鐵軌的 快樂機會成本是多少呢?
Here is my naive advertising man's suggestion. What you should in fact do is employ all of the world's top male and female supermodels, pay them to walk the length of the train, handing out free Chateau Petrus for the entire duration of the journey. (Laughter) (Applause) Now, you'll still have about three billion pounds left in change, and people will ask for the trains to be slowed down. (Laughter)
作為一個天真的廣告人,我的建議是: 實際上應該把所有世界頂級的男模, 和女模請來, 在旅途的全程走秀,免費發放波得路堡紅葡萄酒 直到旅程結束。 (笑) (掌聲) 這樣的話,還能省下三十億英鎊左右, 而且人們反而還會要求火車開的慢點。 (笑)
Now, here is another naive advertising man's question again. And this shows that engineers, medical people, scientific people, have an obsession with solving the problems of reality, when actually most problems, once you reach a basic level of wealth in society, most problems are actually problems of perception. So I'll ask you another question. What on earth is wrong with placebos? They seem fantastic to me. They cost very little to develop. They work extraordinarily well. They have no side effects, or if they do, they're imaginary, so you can safely ignore them. (Laughter)
現在,我這個天真的廣告人又要提一個問題了。 剛才的例子說明,工程師、 醫生和科學家, 都執迷於解決現實問題, 而實際上,當人們在社會中達到了一定的財富水準, 大多數問題其實是感知上的問題。 所以,我要再問你們一個問題。 百憂解到底有什麼不妥? 我覺得這個主意太棒了。不僅研製成本很低, 而且效果非常好, 還無副作用, 如果有的話,也只是你的想像,完全可以忽略它。 (笑)
So I was discussing this. And I actually went to the Marginal Revolution blog by Tyler Cowen. I don't know if anybody knows it. Someone was actually suggesting that you can take this concept further, and actually produce placebo education. The point is that education doesn't actually work by teaching you things. It actually works by giving you the impression that you've had a very good education, which gives you an insane sense of unwarranted self-confidence, which then makes you very, very successful in later life. So, welcome to Oxford, ladies and gentlemen. (Laughter) (Applause)
所以我開始與人討論這個問題。我還到泰勒·考恩(Tyler Cowen)名為邊際革命的部落格上留言。 我不知道是否有人知道。 實際上,有人建議把這一概念帶到更深的層面, 發展安慰教育。 這一觀點認為,教育的作用並不是通過教授知識而產生的。 而是通過讓人們產生其已接受良好教育的印象而產生的。 這種印象給人們不切實際的 強烈信心 並使他們在今後的生活中非常成功。 所以,女士們先生們,歡迎來到牛津大學。 (笑) (掌聲)
But, actually, the point of placebo education is interesting. How many problems of life can be solved actually by tinkering with perception, rather than that tedious, hardworking and messy business of actually trying to change reality? Here's a great example from history. I've heard this attributed to several other kings, but doing a bit of historical research, it seems to be Fredrick the Great. Fredrick the Great of Prussia was very, very keen for the Germans to adopt the potato and to eat it, because he realized that if you had two sources of carbohydrate, wheat and potatoes, you get less price volatility in bread. And you get a far lower risk of famine, because you actually had two crops to fall back on, not one.
但實際上,安慰教育背後的觀點很有趣。 生活中有多少問題 能通過改變感知來解決, 而不是通過既乏味又辛苦的努力 改變現實? 歷史上有個很好的例子。我聽說有人把這件事被歸功於其他幾個國王, 但我做了一些歷史研究, 應該發生在弗雷德里克大帝身上。 普魯士的弗雷德里克大帝一度非常希望 德國人接受馬鈴薯,食用馬鈴薯。 因為他認為,如果有小麥和馬鈴薯這兩種碳水化合物的來源, 可以減少麵包價格的動盪。 同時,也可以大大降低發生饑荒的風險, 因為有兩種作物可以依靠,而不是一種。
The only problem is: potatoes, if you think about it, look pretty disgusting. And also, 18th century Prussians ate very, very few vegetables -- rather like contemporary Scottish people. (Laughter) So, actually, he tried making it compulsory. The Prussian peasantry said, "We can't even get the dogs to eat these damn things. They are absolutely disgusting and they're good for nothing." There are even records of people being executed for refusing to grow potatoes.
唯一的問題是:馬鈴薯,如果大家想一想,看上去相當醜。 而且,18世紀的普魯士人吃非常非常少的蔬菜-- 很像現在的蘇格蘭人。 (笑) 於是,他最後採取了強制的措施。 普魯士的農民們說: “我們甚至沒辦法讓狗吃這些噁心的東西。 這些馬鈴薯令人作嘔,而且毫無用處。” 甚至有許許多多的人由於拒絕種植馬鈴薯 而被處死。
So he tried plan B. He tried the marketing solution, which is he declared the potato as a royal vegetable, and none but the royal family could consume it. And he planted it in a royal potato patch, with guards who had instructions to guard over it, night and day, but with secret instructions not to guard it very well. (Laughter) Now, 18th century peasants know that there is one pretty safe rule in life, which is if something is worth guarding, it's worth stealing. Before long, there was a massive underground potato-growing operation in Germany. What he'd effectively done is he'd re-branded the potato. It was an absolute masterpiece.
於是,他又想了另一個辦法。 他採取了行銷的手段,宣佈馬鈴薯是宮廷御用蔬菜。 只有皇室家族成員才能享用。 他在一片皇家馬鈴薯地中種植馬鈴薯, 並派侍衛 日夜加以看守, 但卻密令他們無需太過認真。 (笑) 18世紀的農民們懂得一個生活常識, 那就是值得看守的東西, 也值得偷。 不久,德國就出現了規模宏大的 地下馬鈴薯種植。 他非常成功的重塑了馬鈴薯的品牌形象。 這絕對是一個經典。
I told this story and a gentleman from Turkey came up to me and said, "Very, very good marketer, Fredrick the Great. But not a patch on Ataturk." Ataturk, rather like Nicolas Sarkozy, was very keen to discourage the wearing of a veil, in Turkey, to modernize it. Now, boring people would have just simply banned the veil. But that would have ended up with a lot of awful kickback and a hell of a lot of resistance. Ataturk was a lateral thinker. He made it compulsory for prostitutes to wear the veil. (Laughter) (Applause)
我講述了這個故事然後一位來自土耳其的先生過來找我說, “非常非常好的行銷,Fredrick太偉大了。不過和Ataturk比起來還差早了。” Ataturk,和Nicolas Sarkozy(法國總統)很像。 非常渴望拋棄土耳其社會戴面紗的習慣, 使其具有現代氣息。 那麼,沒創意的人可能就會簡單的禁止佩戴面紗。 但是那會以強烈的負面反響而告終 以及鋪天蓋地的抵制。 Ataturk運用橫向思維進行思考。 他規定妓女必須佩戴面紗。 (笑) (掌聲)
I can't verify that fully, but it does not matter. There is your environmental problem solved, by the way, guys: All convicted child molesters have to drive a Porsche Cayenne. (Laughter) What Ataturk realized actually is two very fundamental things. Which is that, actually, first one, all value is actually relative. All value is perceived value.
我並不能完全證實這個的真實性。不過這並沒關係。 (關鍵是)社會環境問題解決了,順便提一句,各位: 所有被判刑的猥褻兒童者 必須駕駛保時捷休旅車。 (笑) Ataturk揭示的實際是兩個基本事實。 其中,實際上,第一個是, 所有的價值都是相對價值。 所有的價值都是感知價值。
For those of you who don't speak Spanish, jugo de naranja -- it's actually the Spanish for "orange juice." Because actually it's not the dollar. It's actually the peso in Buenos Aires. Very clever Buenos Aires street vendors decided to practice price discrimination to the detriment of any passing gringo tourists. As an advertising man, I have to admire that.
對於不會西班牙語的人,jugo de naranja--實際上就是西班牙語中“橘子汁”的意思。 因為實際上那不是美元,而是比索 在布宜諾賽利斯,非常聰明的街頭售貨商 決定實踐一下這種價格歧視 用來占任何一個路過的美國佬的便宜。 作為一個廣告人,我不能不對此表示欽佩。
But the first thing is that all value is subjective. Second point is that persuasion is often better than compulsion. These funny signs that flash your speed at you, some of the new ones, on the bottom right, now actually show a smiley face or a frowny face, to act as an emotional trigger. What's fascinating about these signs is they cost about 10 percent of the running cost of a conventional speed camera, but they prevent twice as many accidents. So, the bizarre thing, which is baffling to conventional, classically trained economists, is that a weird little smiley face has a better effect on changing your behavior than the threat of a £60 fine and three penalty points.
不過這一切都說明了第一個道理,也就是所有的價值都是主觀的。 第二點是說服往往要比強制更有效。 這些有趣的標誌在你瞬間路過的時候顯示出即時速度, 有一些新的標誌,右下方, 實際上顯示的是笑臉或者皺眉臉, 實際上在情緒層面觸發共鳴。 這些標誌的了不起的地方在於,它們僅僅花費了傳統超速相機 十分之一的成本。 卻阻止了兩倍數量的事故的發生。 所以,這種奇怪的事情困擾著 傳統的,古典主義經濟學家, 也就是一個奇怪的微笑著的小頭像 在改變個人行為上的作用 比60英鎊的罰款和給予3個點數的罰分還要有效。
Tiny little behavioral economics detail: in Italy, penalty points go backwards. You start with 12 and they take them away. Because they found that loss aversion is a more powerful influence on people's behavior. In Britain we tend to feel, "Whoa! Got another three!" Not so in Italy.
一個很小的行為經濟學的細節: 在義大利,罰分制度恰恰相反。 從12分起,逐漸減少。 因為人們發現厭惡因素的減少 在影響人們行為上具有更大的作用。 在英國我們往往會想,“哇哦,又吃了3分!” 但是在義大利卻不是這樣。
Another fantastic case of creating intangible value to replace actual or material value, which remember, is what, after all, the environmental movement needs to be about: This again is from Prussia, from, I think, about 1812, 1813. The wealthy Prussians, to help in the war against the French, were encouraged to give in all their jewelry. And it was replaced with replica jewelry made of cast iron. Here's one: "Gold gab ich für Eisen, 1813." The interesting thing is that for 50 years hence, the highest status jewelry you could wear in Prussia wasn't made of gold or diamonds. It was made of cast iron. Because actually, never mind the actual intrinsic value of having gold jewelry. This actually had symbolic value, badge value. It said that your family had made a great sacrifice in the past.
還有一個講述創造無形價值來代替物質價值的 極好例子,就是, 終究,環保運動會觸及的問題: 這個,同樣,還是來自普魯士,我想,大概1812或1813年左右。 富裕的普魯士人,為了在普法戰爭中取得優勢, 被鼓勵捐出他們的全部珠寶。 然後用以生鐵鑄造的珠寶的 複製品代替。 瞧這個:“Gold gab ich für Eisen,1813年。” 有趣的事情是從這之後的50年, 普魯士社會最高等級的珠寶 不是金製或鑽石製。 而是生鐵製。 因為事實上,不考慮實際的內在價值 比如金珠寶。這件珠寶 具有象徵價值,標記價值。 它象徵著你的家庭在過去做出過很大的貢獻。
So, the modern equivalent would of course be this. (Laughter) But, actually, there is a thing, just as there are Veblen goods, where the value of the good depends on it being expensive and rare -- there are opposite kind of things where actually the value in them depends on them being ubiquitous, classless and minimalistic.
所以,在現代社會等價的東西應該類似這種。 (笑) 不過,事實上,有一種商品,正如一種叫做Veblen商品的東西, 它的價值取決於本身的昂貴和稀有-- 而它們是恰恰相反的一類東西 其價值恰恰在於它們本身的 普通性,大眾化和簡單性。
If you think about it, Shakerism was a proto-environmental movement. Adam Smith talks about 18th century America, where the prohibition against visible displays of wealth was so great, it was almost a block in the economy in New England, because even wealthy farmers could find nothing to spend their money on without incurring the displeasure of their neighbors. It's perfectly possible to create these social pressures which lead to more egalitarian societies.
如果你想一想的話,震顫派宗教儀式是一種原始的環保運動。 Adam Smith談論到18世紀的美國 當時抵制物質上的可視財富的運動如火如荼, 幾乎對新英格蘭的經濟發展造成了阻礙, 因為即使是富裕的農民也不知道該把錢花在哪, 除非招致鄰居的鄙夷。 創造一種有利於社會平等的輿論壓力 是完全可能的。
What's also interesting, if you look at products that have a high component of what you might call messaging value, a high component of intangible value, versus their intrinsic value: They are often quite egalitarian. In terms of dress, denim is perhaps the perfect example of something which replaces material value with symbolic value. Coca-Cola. A bunch of you may be a load of pinkos, and you may not like the Coca-Cola company, but it's worth remembering Andy Warhol's point about Coke. What Warhol said about Coke is, he said, "What I really like about Coca-Cola is the president of the United States can't get a better Coke than the bum on the corner of the street." Now, that is, actually, when you think about it -- we take it for granted -- it's actually a remarkable achievement, to produce something that's that democratic.
同樣有趣的是,如果你仔細觀察 高科技部件組成的產品 或許你們會叫做資訊價值, 這類元件高度集成了無形價值,而不是內在價值: 它們經常很好的詮釋了平等主義。 就服裝而言,牛仔布或許是詮釋象徵價值(而不是物質價值) 的最好的例子了。 可口可樂。也許你們中的某些人是傾左派的, 或許你並不喜歡可口可樂公司。 不過Andy Warhol對於它的評價卻十分耐人尋味。 他說, “我之所以愛可口可樂是因為即使是美國總統喝的可樂 也和街邊流浪漢手中的可樂別無二樣。” 實際上如果你仔細想想的話,我們都把它當做理所當然了-- 但實際上是很了不起的成就, 如此民主的一種產品。
Now, we basically have to change our views slightly. There is a basic view that real value involves making things, involves labor. It involves engineering. It involves limited raw materials. And that what we add on top is kind of false. It's a fake version. And there is a reason for some suspicion and uncertainly about it. It patently veers toward propaganda. However, what we do have now is a much more variegated media ecosystem in which to kind of create this kind of value, and it's much fairer.
那麼,我們需要把自己的看法稍微轉變一下。 基本的看法是(產品的)實際價值包括製作的過程, 包括勞動力。如工程設計。 包括有限的原材料。 現在我們要加上一種好像虛化的東西。好像是不真實的。 當然許多的懷疑和不確定是有原因的。 顯然這個因素就是宣傳作用。 然而,我們現在擁有的 是一個更加多樣化的媒介環境 在其中我們創造這種價值。這樣就合理多了。
When I grew up, this was basically the media environment of my childhood as translated into food. You had a monopoly supplier. On the left, you have Rupert Murdoch, or the BBC. (Laughter) And on your right you have a dependent public which is pathetically grateful for anything you give it. (Laughter)
當我長大了,我小時候的媒體環境差不多是這樣的 可以理解為食物。 左邊這個,是唯一的提供者。 當時還有Rupert Murdoch,或者BBC。 (笑) 右邊是依賴性很強的大眾 可憐的是,無論你提供什麼,他都會心存感激。 (笑)
Nowadays, the user is actually involved. This is actually what's called, in the digital world, "user-generated content." Although it's called agriculture in the world of food. (Laughter) This is actually called a mash-up, where you take content that someone else has produced and you do something new with it. In the world of food we call it cooking. This is food 2.0, which is food you produce for the purpose of sharing it with other people. This is mobile food. British are very good at that. Fish and chips in newspaper, the Cornish Pasty, the pie, the sandwich. We invented the whole lot of them. We're not very good at food in general. Italians do great food, but it's not very portable, generally. (Laughter)
現如今,用戶都已經進化了。 這個在數碼世界裏,實際上叫做“用戶為中心的實體。” 儘管叫做農業,在食物這個角度看。 (笑) 這個實際上叫做“糅合”, 也就是你以其他人的生產結果為起點 創造出新的東西。 在食物的角度來看我們叫它烹飪。 這個叫食物2.0版本, 也就是以與其他人分享為目的而生產食物。 這叫移動食物。英國人很擅長。 把魚和薯條夾在報紙裏,Cornish Pastie, 派,三明治。 全是我們發明的。 總體上來講我們做東西並不好吃。義大利人這方面很棒, 不過總的來說,攜帶性就差了點。 (笑)
I only learned this the other day. The Earl of Sandwich didn't invent the sandwich. He actually invented the toasty. But then, the Earl of Toasty would be a ridiculous name. (Laughter)
直到有一天我才知道這點。三明治伯爵並未發明三明治。 實際上他發明的是烤麵包。不過那時,如果叫烤麵包伯爵就太荒唐了。 (笑)
Finally, we have contextual communication. Now, the reason I show you Pernod -- it's only one example. Every country has a contextual alcoholic drink. In France it's Pernod. It tastes great within the borders of that country, but absolute shite if you take it anywhere else. (Laughter) Unicum in Hungary, for example. The Greeks have actually managed to produce something called Retsina, which even tastes shite when you're in Greece. (Laughter)
最後,還有內容關聯式溝通。 那麼,我之所以要展示潘諾酒--這只是一個例子。 每個國家都有與其背景關聯的酒品。在法國就是潘諾酒。 在這個國家境內品嘗的話,美味無比。 不過如果你帶出去嘗嘗的話,簡直糟透了。 (笑) 還有,比如說匈牙利的Unicum。 希臘人實際上生產了一種叫做Retsina的酒, 不過即使在希臘品嘗也很難喝。 (笑)
But so much communication now is contextual that the capacity for actually nudging people, for giving them better information -- B.J. Fogg, at the University of Stanford, makes the point that actually the mobile phone is -- He's invented the phrase, "persuasive technologies." He believes the mobile phone, by being location-specific, contextual, timely and immediate, is simply the greatest persuasive technology device ever invented.
但是如此多的交流實際上已經關聯化了 這種強迫人們的能力, 為了更好的說明--來自Stanford大學的, B.J.Fogg,認為 手機實際上是-- 他發明了一個短語,叫做“說服性科技。” 他認為手機,因為地點特有性, 背景關聯性,即時性和直接性, 是最直接和最偉大的說服性科技產品的代表。
Now, if we have all these tools at our disposal, we simply have to ask the question, and Thaler and Sunstein have, of how we can use these more intelligently. I'll give you one example. If you had a large red button of this kind, on the wall of your home, and every time you pressed it, it saved 50 dollars for you, put 50 dollars into your pension, you would save a lot more. The reason is that the interface fundamentally determines the behavior. Okay?
那麼,如果我們擁有了所有的這些工具, 我們僅僅需要問這樣一個, Thaler和Sunstein曾經問過的問題,也就是如何更聰明的使用它們。 我再舉一個例子。 如果在你家中的牆上有這樣一個大大的,紅色的按鈕, 每次你只要按它一下,就可以節省50美元, 使你的津貼增加50美元, 你節省下來的遠遠不止這麼一些。 原因是介面從根本上決定了 行為。明白了嗎?
Now, marketing has done a very, very good job of creating opportunities for impulse buying. Yet we've never created the opportunity for impulse saving. If you did this, more people would save more. It's simply a question of changing the interface by which people make decisions, and the very nature of the decisions changes. Obviously, I don't want people to do this, because as an advertising man I tend to regard saving as just consumerism needlessly postponed. (Laughter) But if anybody did want to do that, that's the kind of thing we need to be thinking about, actually: fundamental opportunities to change human behavior.
那麼,行銷在鼓動即興購買這一方面 做的非常好。 我們永遠不會鼓動消費者即興省錢。 如果這樣的話,更多的人會節省過多。 這實際上就是一個改變影響人們做出決定 的介面的問題。 也就是改變決定的本質的問題。 很顯然,我並不想要人們這樣做, 因為作為一個廣告人我更願意把節省看做 不必要的延緩的消費者主義。 (笑) 不過如果有人真的想那樣做的話, 實際上我們需要認真加以斟酌: 改變人類行為的基本機會。
Now, I've got an example here from Canada. There was a young intern at Ogilvy Canada called Hunter Somerville, who was working in improv in Toronto, and got a part-time job in advertising, and was given the job of advertising Shreddies. Now this is the most perfect case of creating intangible, added value, without changing the product in the slightest. Shreddies is a strange, square, whole-grain cereal, only available in New Zealand, Canada and Britain. It's Kraft's peculiar way of rewarding loyalty to the crown. (Laughter) In working out how you could re-launch Shreddies, he came up with this.
現在我要舉出一個加拿大的例子。 有一個在Ogilvy加拿大實習的年輕人 他的名字叫Hunter Somerville, 在多倫多做即興表演, 同時兼職做廣告的工作, 他為一個叫Shreddies的商品做廣告。 這是一個關於創造無形附加價值的 絕好例子, 不需要對產品本身的分量做出一點改變。 Shreddies是一種奇怪的,正方形的全麥麥片, 只有在紐西蘭,加拿大和英國才可以見到。 這是 Kraft 對於效忠女王的獨特嘉獎方式。 (笑) 在策劃如何使Shreddies重新上市的過程中, 他想到了這個主意。
Video: (Buzzer) Man: Shreddies is supposed to be square. (Laughter)
視頻:(嗡嗡響) 男工:Shreddies應該是方形的啊。 (笑)
Woman: Have any of these diamond shapes gone out? (Laughter)
女士:這些鑽石形狀的應該都沒有洩露出去吧? (笑)
Voiceover: New Diamond Shreddies cereal. Same 100 percent whole-grain wheat in a delicious diamond shape. (Applause)
畫外音:新型鑽石狀的Shreddies麥片。 鑽石形狀新品:同樣百分百全麥,更加美味。 (掌聲)
Rory Sutherland: I'm not sure this isn't the most perfect example of intangible value creation. All it requires is photons, neurons, and a great idea to create this thing. I would say it's a work of genius. But, naturally, you can't do this kind of thing without a little bit of market research.
Rory Sutherland:我認為這是最完美的一個例子 關於詮釋創造無形價值。我們只需要 光子,神經細胞,以及極具創造力的點子。 我不得不說這是天才之作。 但是,自然地,在做這樣的事情前要做一點市場調研。
Man: So, Shreddies is actually producing a new product, which is something very exciting for them. So they are introducing new Diamond Shreddies. (Laughter) So I just want to get your first impressions when you see that, when you see the Diamond Shreddies box there. (Laughter)
男士:那麼,Shreddies事實上在生產一種新產品, 對他們來說這是十分令人興奮的事情。 這是他們在介紹新的鑽石Shreddies。 (笑) 現在我希望能夠知道到你們看到它的第一印象, 當你看到這個鑽石Shreddies的盒子的時候。 (笑)
Woman: Weren't they square?
女士:它們不是方形的嗎?
Woman #2: I'm a little bit confused. Woman #3: They look like the squares to me.
女士2:我有點搞不清了。女士3:我認為它們看起來就是方形的。
Man: They -- Yeah, it's all in the appearance. But it's kind of like flipping a six or a nine. Like a six, if you flip it over it looks like a nine. But a six is very different from a nine.
男士:它們--是的,全都寫在外表裏了。 不過這有點像擲骰子中的6或者9. 如果你倒過來看它就像9. 但是6和9是不同的。
Woman # 3: Or an "M" and a "W". Man: An "M" and a "W", exactly.
女士3:或者“M”和“W”。男士:“M”和“W”,沒錯。
Man #2: [unclear] You just looked like you turned it on its end. But when you see it like that it's more interesting looking.
男士2:[疑惑] 看起來就好像轉了一個角度。不過當你那樣看的時候 它看起來更有趣。
Man: Just try both of them. Take a square one there, first. (Laughter) Man: Which one did you prefer? Man #2: The first one.
男士:兩種都試試。 先嘗一下方形的這個。 (笑) 男士:你更喜歡哪個?男士2:第一個。
Man: The first one? (Laughter)
男士:第一個? (笑)
Rory Sutherland: Now, naturally, a debate raged. There were conservative elements in Canada, unsurprisingly, who actually resented this intrusion. So, eventually, the manufacturers actually arrived at a compromise, which was the combo pack. (Laughter) (Applause) (Laughter)
Rory Sutherland:現在,很自然的,一場激烈的辯論。 不出意料,加拿大人骨子裏也是有保守思想的, 他實際上並不喜歡這種改變。 所以,最後的結果是,製造商 達成了一個折中的方案,也就是組合包。 (笑) (掌聲) (大笑)
If you think it's funny, bear in mind there is an organization called the American Institute of Wine Economics, which actually does extensive research into perception of things, and discovers that except for among perhaps five or ten percent of the most knowledgeable people, there is no correlation between quality and enjoyment in wine, except when you tell the people how expensive it is, in which case they tend to enjoy the more expensive stuff more. So drink your wine blind in the future.
如果你覺得這很有趣的話,請記住有一個叫做 “美國釀酒經濟協會”的組織, 他們實地做了很多關於事物認知的深度的調查, 發現除了 百分之五或者百分之十那一部分最有見地的人以外, 品質和產品體驗之間沒有關聯 就酒類來說, 除非你告訴人們這個東西有多貴, 在這種情況下他們傾向於更享受貴的東西。 所以以後喝酒就別看價錢了。
But this is both hysterically funny -- but I think an important philosophical point, which is, going forward, we need more of this kind of value. We need to spend more time appreciating what already exists, and less time agonizing over what else we can do.
不過這兩者都非常有趣-- 但是我思考了一個很重要的哲學觀點, 就是,向前探索,我們需要更多這種的價值。 我們需要更多的時間品味已經存在的事物, 而少花一點時間去為難自己搞新的花樣。
Two quotations to more or less end with. One of them is, "Poetry is when you make new things familiar and familiar things new." Which isn't a bad definition of what our job is, to help people appreciate what is unfamiliar, but also to gain a greater appreciation, and place a far higher value on those things which are already existing. There is some evidence, by the way, that things like social networking help do that. Because they help people share news. They give badge value to everyday little trivial activities. So they actually reduce the need for actually spending great money on display, and increase the kind of third-party enjoyment you can get from the smallest, simplest things in life. Which is magic.
差不多引用這兩句作為結尾吧。 一個是,“詩歌就是使新事物親切近人並且 使熟悉的事物衍生出新意。” 這不失為一個對我們工作的好定義, 去幫助人們欣賞不熟悉的東西,同時也 對已經存在的東西更加珍惜,或者 提升它們的價值。 順便說一下,有證據表明,像社交網路這種東西會對此有幫助。 因為這有助於人們分享資訊。 它們將每天的瑣碎活動賦予標記價值。 所以事實上它減少了用於公開展示的花銷, 而且增加了類似於這種第三方的 的樂趣,這些你可以從最小的,最簡單的生活事物中獲得的樂趣。這真是太神奇了。
The second one is the second G.K. Chesterton quote of this session, which is, "We are perishing for want of wonder, not for want of wonders," which I think for anybody involved in technology, is perfectly true. And a final thing: When you place a value on things like health, love, sex and other things, and learn to place a material value on what you've previously discounted for being merely intangible, a thing not seen, you realize you're much, much wealthier than you ever imagined. Thank you very much indeed. (Applause)
第二個是這場演講中第二次對G.K.Chesterton的引用, 也就是,“使我們滅亡的,是對一個奇蹟的渴望,而不是對眾多奇蹟的渴望,” 這個我認為對於科技業的有關人士,應該感觸尤為深刻。 最後一點:當你把價值附加于像健康, 愛情,性和其他的這種事情時, 同時學會去把物質價值附加在 你之前所不重視的事物上 不要僅僅是因為它們無形,或者太過渺小, 你會發現你會比你所能想像的更加富有。 非常非常感謝大家。 (掌聲)