Cultural evolution is a dangerous child for any species to let loose on its planet. By the time you realize what's happening, the child is a toddler, up and causing havoc, and it's too late to put it back. We humans are Earth's Pandoran species. We're the ones who let the second replicator out of its box, and we can't push it back in. We're seeing the consequences all around us.
Kulturna evolucija je opasno dijete za pustiti na svom planetu. Dok shvatimo što se događa, dijete odraste stvara kaos, i prekasno je za vratiti ga. Mi ljudi smo Zemljina Pandorina vrsta. Mi smo pustili drugog replikatora iz kutije, i ne možemo ga vratiti unutra. Vidimo posljedice svugdje oko nas.
Now that, I suggest, is the view that comes out of taking memetics seriously. And it gives us a new way of thinking about not only what's going on on our planet, but what might be going on elsewhere in the cosmos. So first of all, I'd like to say something about memetics and the theory of memes, and secondly, how this might answer questions about who's out there, if indeed anyone is.
To je pogled koji slijedi iz ozbiljnog shvaćanja memetike. I pruža nam novi način razmišljanja o zbivanju ne samo na našem planetu, nego i onom što bi se moglo događati drugdje u svemiru. Zato bih najprije željela reći nešto o memetici i teoriji o memima, a potom bi tako mogli odgovoriti na pitanje je li netko vani ako netko jest.
So, memetics: memetics is founded on the principle of Universal Darwinism. Darwin had this amazing idea. Indeed, some people say it's the best idea anybody ever had. Isn't that a wonderful thought, that there could be such a thing as a best idea anybody ever had? Do you think there could? Audience: No. (Laughter) Susan Blackmore: Someone says no, very loudly, from over there. Well, I say yes, and if there is, I give the prize to Darwin.
Dakle, memetika. Memetika se temelji na principu univerzalnog darvinizma. Darwin je imao fascinantnu ideju. Zapravo, neki ljudi kažu najbolju ideju koje se itko ikada sjetio. Nije li to predivna pomisao, da postoji nešto kao najbolja ideja koje se itko ikada sjetio? Mislite da postoji? Publika: Ne. (Smijeh) Netko je rekao ne.. Pa, ja kažem da, i da postoji, dala bih nagradu Darwinu.
Why? Because the idea was so simple, and yet it explains all design in the universe. I would say not just biological design, but all of the design that we think of as human design. It's all just the same thing happening. What did Darwin say? I know you know the idea, natural selection, but let me just paraphrase "The Origin of Species," 1859, in a few sentences.
Zašto? Jer je ideja bila tako jednostavna, a objašnjava sav dizajn u svemiru. Rekla bih ne samo biološki, već sav dizajn koji smatramo ljudskim dizajnom. To je sve jedna te ista stvar. Što je Darwin rekao? Znam da poznajete ideju - prirodna selekcija, ali dopustite mi da parafraziram "Porijeklo vrsta", 1859. u nekoliko rečenica.
What Darwin said was something like this: if you have creatures that vary, and that can't be doubted -- I've been to the Galapagos, and I've measured the size of the beaks and the size of the turtle shells and so on, and so on. And 100 pages later. (Laughter) And if there is a struggle for life, such that nearly all of these creatures die -- and this can't be doubted, I've read Malthus and I've calculated how long it would take for elephants to cover the whole world if they bred unrestricted, and so on and so on. And another 100 pages later. And if the very few that survive pass onto their offspring whatever it was that helped them survive, then those offspring must be better adapted to the circumstances in which all this happened than their parents were.
Darwin je rekao nešto poput ovoga -- ako imate bića koja se razlikuju, a to je nesumljivo -- bio sam na Galapagosu i mjerio veličine kljunova i veličine oklopa kornjača, itd, itd. I 100 stranica poslije -- (Smijeh) I ako postoji borba za život, takva da gotovo sva ta bića uginu -- a ovo je nesumljivo, pročitao sam Malthusa i izračunao koliko bi trebalo slonovima da prekriju Svijet neograničenim razmnožavanjem, itd itd. I još 100 stranica poslije. I ako nekolicina koji prežive prenesu na potomke štogod im je pomoglo da prežive, onda ti potomci moraju biti bolje prilagođeni okolnostima u kojima se to zbivalo nego njihovi roditelji.
You see the idea? If, if, if, then. He had no concept of the idea of an algorithm, but that's what he described in that book, and this is what we now know as the evolutionary algorithm. The principle is you just need those three things -- variation, selection and heredity. And as Dan Dennett puts it, if you have those, then you must get evolution. Or design out of chaos, without the aid of mind.
Shvaćate ideju? Ako, ako, ako, onda. On nije znao za ideju algoritma. Ali to je ono što je opisao u toj knjizi, i to je ono što nazivamo evolucijskim algoritmom. Princip je da su potrebne te tri stvari -- varijacija, selekcija i nasljednost. I kako bi Dan Dennett rekao, ako njih imaš onda moraš dobiti evoluciju. Ili dizajn iz kaosa bez pomoći uma.
There's one word I love on that slide. What do you think my favorite word is? Audience: Chaos. SB: Chaos? No. What? Mind? No. Audience: Without. SB: No, not without. (Laughter) You try them all in order: Mmm...? Audience: Must. SB: Must, at must. Must, must. This is what makes it so amazing. You don't need a designer, or a plan, or foresight, or anything else. If there's something that is copied with variation and it's selected, then you must get design appearing out of nowhere. You can't stop it. Must is my favorite word there.
Jednu riječ s tog slajda volim. Što mislite, koja je to riječ? Publika: Kaos. Kaos? Ne. Um? Ne. Publika: Bez. Nije bez. (Smijeh) Pokušajte sve po redu: Mmm... ? Publika: Mora. Mora, konačno. Mora, mora. To je ono što to čini tako zadivljujućim. Ne trebate stvoritelja, ili plan, ili predumišljaj ili išta drugo. Ako postoji nešto što se kopira s varijacijom i to je odabrano, onda morate dobiti dizajn iz ničega. Ne možete to zaustaviti. "Mora" je moja najdraža riječ tamo.
Now, what's this to do with memes? Well, the principle here applies to anything that is copied with variation and selection. We're so used to thinking in terms of biology, we think about genes this way. Darwin didn't, of course; he didn't know about genes. He talked mostly about animals and plants, but also about languages evolving and becoming extinct. But the principle of Universal Darwinism is that any information that is varied and selected will produce design.
Kakve to ima veze s memima? Princip se primjenjuje na bilo što što se kopira varijacijom i selekcijom. Naviknuti smo na razmišljanje u terminima biologije, tako razmišljamo o genima. Darwin, dakako, nije ni znao za gene. Uglavnom je pričao o životinjama i biljkama, ali i o jezicima kako evoluiraju i izumiru. Ali princip univerzalnog darvinizma je da će bilo koja informacija koja varira i odabire se stvoriti dizajn.
And this is what Richard Dawkins was on about in his 1976 bestseller, "The Selfish Gene." The information that is copied, he called the replicator. It selfishly copies. Not meaning it kind of sits around inside cells going, "I want to get copied." But that it will get copied if it can, regardless of the consequences. It doesn't care about the consequences because it can't, because it's just information being copied. And he wanted to get away from everybody thinking all the time about genes, and so he said, "Is there another replicator out there on the planet?" Ah, yes, there is.
To je ono o čemu je Richard Dawkins pričao u svom bestselleru iz 1976, "Sebični gen". Informacija koja se kopira, nju je zvao replikatorom. Sebično se kopira. Ne u smislu da leži unutar stanica i govori, "Želim se kopirati." Nego da će se kopirati ako može, bez obzira na posljedice. Ne mari za posljedice jer nije sposobna, jer je to samo informacija. I želio se odmaknuti od svih koji su razmišljali samo o genima, rekao je, "Postoji li još replikatora na ovom planetu?" Ah, da, postoji.
Look around you -- here will do, in this room. All around us, still clumsily drifting about in its primeval soup of culture, is another replicator. Information that we copy from person to person, by imitation, by language, by talking, by telling stories, by wearing clothes, by doing things. This is information copied with variation and selection. This is design process going on. He wanted a name for the new replicator. So, he took the Greek word "mimeme," which means that which is imitated. Remember that, that's the core definition: that which is imitated. And abbreviated it to meme, just because it sounds good and made a good meme, an effective spreading meme. So that's how the idea came about. It's important to stick with that definition.
Pogledajte oko sebe, u ovoj sobi. Svugdje oko nas, nespretno se valja u kulturnoj prajuhi, je drugi replikator. Informacija koju kopiramo od osobe do osobe imitacijom, jezikom, govorom, pričanjem priča, nošenjem odjeće, radeći stvari. To je informacija kopirana s varijacijom i selekcijom. To je proces dizajna koji se zbiva. Želio je ime za novi replikator. Pa je uzeo grču riječ "mimeme", što znači "ono što je imitirano". To je ključna definicija. Ono što se imitira. I skratio to na mem, jer zvuči dobro i stvorio dobar mem, efektivni šireći mem. Znači tako je ideja nastala. Važno je držati se te definicije.
The whole science of memetics is much maligned, much misunderstood, much feared. But a lot of these problems can be avoided by remembering the definition. A meme is not equivalent to an idea. It's not an idea. It's not equivalent to anything else, really. Stick with the definition. It's that which is imitated, or information which is copied from person to person. So, let's see some memes.
Cijela znanost memetike je omražena, krivo shvaćena i pribojavana. Ali mnogo tih problema možemo izbjeći prisjećajući se definicije. Mem nije ideja. Nije ideja, nije ekvivalent ničem drugom. Držite se definicije. To je ono što se imitira. Ili informacija koja je kopirana od osobe do osobe. Pogledajmo memove.
Well, you sir, you've got those glasses hung around your neck in that particularly fetching way. I wonder whether you invented that idea for yourself, or copied it from someone else? If you copied it from someone else, it's a meme. And what about, oh, I can't see any interesting memes here. All right everyone, who's got some interesting memes for me? Oh, well, your earrings, I don't suppose you invented the idea of earrings. You probably went out and bought them. There are plenty more in the shops. That's something that's passed on from person to person. All the stories that we're telling -- well, of course, TED is a great meme-fest, masses of memes.
Vi, imate naočale obješene oko vrata na posebno uočljiv način. Jeste li smislili tu ideju sami, ili ste je kopirali od nekog? Ako ste je kopirali od nekog, to je mem. Ne vidim nikakve zanimljive meme ovdje. Tko ima zanimljive meme za mene? Vaše naušnice, Niste izmislili ideju naušnica. Vjerojatno ste ih kupili. Ima ih još mnogo u trgovinama. To se prenosi sa osobe na osobu. Sve priče koje pričamo, pa naravno, TED je sjajan festival mema, masa mema.
The way to think about memes, though, is to think, why do they spread? They're selfish information, they will get copied, if they can. But some of them will be copied because they're good, or true, or useful, or beautiful. Some of them will be copied even though they're not. Some, it's quite hard to tell why.
Način na koji razmišljamo o memima je, zašto se šire? Oni su sebična informacija, kopirat će se ako mogu. Ali neki od njih će se kopirati jer su dobri, ili istiniti, ili korisni, ili prekrasni. Neki od njih će se kopirati iako nisu. Za neke je teško reći zašto.
There's one particular curious meme which I rather enjoy. And I'm glad to say, as I expected, I found it when I came here, and I'm sure all of you found it, too. You go to your nice, posh, international hotel somewhere, and you come in and you put down your clothes and you go to the bathroom, and what do you see? Audience: Bathroom soap. SB: Pardon? Audience: Soap. SB: Soap, yeah. What else do you see? Audience: (Inaudible) SB: Mmm mmm. Audience: Sink, toilet! SB: Sink, toilet, yes, these are all memes, they're all memes, but they're sort of useful ones, and then there's this one. (Laughter) What is this one doing? (Laughter) This has spread all over the world. It's not surprising that you all found it when you arrived in your bathrooms here. But I took this photograph in a toilet at the back of a tent in the eco-camp in the jungle in Assam. (Laughter) Who folded that thing up there, and why? (Laughter) Some people get carried away. (Laughter) Other people are just lazy and make mistakes. Some hotels exploit the opportunity to put even more memes with a little sticker. (Laughter) What is this all about? I suppose it's there to tell you that somebody's cleaned the place, and it's all lovely. And you know, actually, all it tells you is that another person has potentially spread germs from place to place. (Laughter)
Ima jedan meme u kojem uživam. I, očekivano, pronašla sam ga kad sam došla ovdje, sigurna sam da ste ga svi pronašli. Idete u svoj lijepi internacionalni hotel, uđete unutra i skinete svoju odjeću uđete u kupaonicu, i što vidite? Publika: Kupaonski sapun. Oprostite? Publika: Sapun. Sapun, da. Što još vidite? Publika: (Nečujno) Mmm mmm. Publika: Umivaonik, zahod! Umivaonik, zahod, da, to su sve memi, ali oni su recimo korisni, i onda dođe ovaj. (Smijeh) Čemu ovaj služi? (Smijeh) Ovaj se proširio svuda po svijetu. Nije čudno što ste ga svi pronašli kada ste ušli u kupaonice. Uslikala sam ovu fotografiju u zahodu iza šatora u eko-kampu u džungli u Assamu. (Smijeh) Tko je zamotao tu stvar, i zašto? (Smijeh) Neki ljudi pretjeruju. (Smijeh) Drugi su samo lijeni i rade greške. Neki hoteli stvore nove memove s naljepnicom. (Smijeh) O čemu se ovdje radi? Pretpostavljam da žele reći kako je netko sve očistio. Ali zapravo vam govori da je ta osoba potencijalno proširila bakterije s mjesta na mjesto. (Smijeh)
So, think of it this way. Imagine a world full of brains and far more memes than can possibly find homes. The memes are all trying to get copied -- trying, in inverted commas -- i.e., that's the shorthand for, if they can get copied, they will. They're using you and me as their propagating, copying machinery, and we are the meme machines.
Gledajte na to ovako. Zamislite svijet pun mozgova. i više memova nego što imaju domova. Memovi se pokušavaju kopirati, pokušavaju, tj. ako se mogu kopirati onda hoće. Iskorištavaju vas i mene kao svoju kopirajuću mašineriju, mi smo strojevi za memove.
Now, why is this important? Why is this useful, or what does it tell us? It gives us a completely new view of human origins and what it means to be human, all conventional theories of cultural evolution, of the origin of humans, and what makes us so different from other species. All other theories explaining the big brain, and language, and tool use and all these things that make us unique, are based upon genes. Language must have been useful for the genes. Tool use must have enhanced our survival, mating and so on. It always comes back, as Richard Dawkins complained all that long time ago, it always comes back to genes.
Zašto je ovo važno? Zašto je ovo korisno, ili što nam to govori? Daje nam novi pogled na ljudsku genezu i što znači biti čovjek. Sve konvencionalne teorije kulturne evolucije, porijekla ljudi, i što nas čini drukčijim od ostalih vrsta. Teorije koje govore o velikom mozgu, jeziku i uporabi alata i sve te stvari koje nas čine posebnima, se temelje na genima. Jezik je morao biti koristan genima. Oruđa su olakšala preživljavanje, razmnožavanje itd. Uvijek se sve vraća, kako se žalio Richard Dawkins uvijek se sve vraća na gene.
The point of memetics is to say, "Oh no, it doesn't." There are two replicators now on this planet. From the moment that our ancestors, perhaps two and a half million years ago or so, began imitating, there was a new copying process. Copying with variation and selection. A new replicator was let loose, and it could never be -- right from the start -- it could never be that human beings who let loose this new creature, could just copy the useful, beautiful, true things, and not copy the other things. While their brains were having an advantage from being able to copy -- lighting fires, keeping fires going, new techniques of hunting, these kinds of things -- inevitably they were also copying putting feathers in their hair, or wearing strange clothes, or painting their faces, or whatever.
Bit memetike je reći, "O, ne vraća se." Postoje dva replikatora na ovom planetu. Od trenutka kada su naši preci, prije nekih dva i pol milijuna godina, počeli imitirati, nastao je novi proces kopiranja. Kopiranja s varijacijom i selekcijom. Novi replikator je oslobođen, i -- od početka, nije moglo biti da ljudska bića koja su pustila ovo novo biće, mogu kopirati samo korisne, lijepe, istinite stvari, a ne kopirati ostale stvari. Njihovi mozgovi su imali prednost od kopiranja -- paljenja vatre, održavanja vatre, novih tehnika lova, takvih vrsta stvari -- neizbježno su kopirali i stavljanje pera u kosu, ili nošenje čudne odjeće, ili bojanja lica, ili bilo što.
So, you get an arms race between the genes which are trying to get the humans to have small economical brains and not waste their time copying all this stuff, and the memes themselves, like the sounds that people made and copied -- in other words, what turned out to be language -- competing to get the brains to get bigger and bigger. So, the big brain, on this theory, is driven by the memes.
Dobijemo utrku u naoružavanju između gena koji pokušavaju ljudima dati male ekonomične mozgove i ne tratiti vrijeme kopirajući sve ove stvari, i mema, poput zvukova koje su ljudi proizvodili i kopirali -- drugim riječima, onog što je na kraju postalo jezik -- natječući se da bi povećali mozgove više i više. Dakle veliki mozak je u ovoj teoriji pogonjen memima.
This is why, in "The Meme Machine," I called it memetic drive. As the memes evolve, as they inevitably must, they drive a bigger brain that is better at copying the memes that are doing the driving. This is why we've ended up with such peculiar brains, that we like religion, and music, and art. Language is a parasite that we've adapted to, not something that was there originally for our genes, on this view. And like most parasites, it can begin dangerous, but then it coevolves and adapts, and we end up with a symbiotic relationship with this new parasite.
Zato sam ga, u "Stroj za memove", nazvala memetskim pogonom. Kako memi evoluiraju, kao što neizbježno moraju, pogone veći mozak koji je bolji u kopiranju mema koji ga pogone. Zato imamo tako čudne mozgove, da nam se sviđaju religije, glazba, i umjetnost. Jezik je parazit kojem smo se prilagodili, a ne nešto stvoreno za gene, iz ovog gledišta. I poput većine parazita može započeti kao opasan, ali onda ko-evoluira i adaptira se i na kraju dolazimo do simbiotske veze s ovim novim parazitom.
And so, from our perspective, we don't realize that that's how it began. So, this is a view of what humans are. All other species on this planet are gene machines only, they don't imitate at all well, hardly at all. We alone are gene machines and meme machines as well. The memes took a gene machine and turned it into a meme machine.
I zato iz naše perspektive, ne uviđamo da je tako počelo. To je pogled na ono što ljudi jesu. Ostale vrste na planetu su isključivo genetski strojevi, ne imitiraju dobro, ako uopće. Jedino mi smo i genski i memski strojevi. Memi su uzeli genski stroj i pretvorili ga u memski stroj.
But that's not all. We have a new kind of memes now. I've been wondering for a long time, since I've been thinking about memes a lot, is there a difference between the memes that we copy -- the words we speak to each other, the gestures we copy, the human things -- and all these technological things around us? I have always, until now, called them all memes, but I do honestly think now we need a new word for technological memes.
Ali to nije sve. Sada imamo novu vrstu mema. Dugo sam se propitkivala, s obzirom da sam puno razmišljala o memima, postoji li razlika između mema koje mi kopiramo -- riječi koje pričamo jedni drugima, običaja koje kopiramo, ljudskim stvarima -- i svih ovih tehnoloških stvari uokolo nas? Uvijek sam ih, do sada, sve nazivala memima, ali sada iskreno smatram kako trebamo novu riječ za tehnološke meme.
Let's call them techno-memes or temes. Because the processes are getting different. We began, perhaps 5,000 years ago, with writing. We put the storage of memes out there on a clay tablet, but in order to get true temes and true teme machines, you need to get the variation, the selection and the copying, all done outside of humans. And we're getting there. We're at this extraordinary point where we're nearly there, that there are machines like that. And indeed, in the short time I've already been at TED, I see we're even closer than I thought we were before.
Nazovimo ih tehnomemi ili temi. Zato što se procesi mijenjaju. Počeli smo, prije 5000 godina, s pisanjem. Pohranjivali smo meme na glinenu ploču, kako bi dobili prave temske strojeve, trebamo varijaciju, selekciju i kopiranje, izvršene bez ljudi. Stižemo ovdje. Došli smo do točke gdje smo zamalo tu, gdje postoje takvi strojevi. I stvarno, u ovo malo vremena što sam na TED-u, vidim da smo bliže nego što sam ikad mislila.
So actually, now the temes are forcing our brains to become more like teme machines. Our children are growing up very quickly learning to read, learning to use machinery. We're going to have all kinds of implants, drugs that force us to stay awake all the time. We'll think we're choosing these things, but the temes are making us do it. So, we're at this cusp now of having a third replicator on our planet. Now, what about what else is going on out there in the universe? Is there anyone else out there? People have been asking this question for a long time. We've been asking it here at TED already. In 1961, Frank Drake made his famous equation, but I think he concentrated on the wrong things. It's been very productive, that equation. He wanted to estimate N, the number of communicative civilizations out there in our galaxy, and he included in there the rate of star formation, the rate of planets, but crucially, intelligence.
Sada temi prisiljavaju naše mozgove da postanu sličniji temskim strojevima. Naša djeca odrastaju jako brzo učeći čitati, učeći koristiti strojeve. Imat ćemo razne implantanate, droge koja nas prisiljavaju da budemo budni. Mislit ćemo da mi biramo te stvari, ali temi nas na to tjeraju. Na granici smo dolaska trećeg replikatora na planet. Što u vezi zbivanja vani u svemiru? Ima li nekoga tamo? Ljudi su se propitkivali ovim dugo vremena. Propitkivali smo se i ovdje na TED-u. 1961., Frank Drake je stvorio poznatu jednadžbu, ali se koncentrirao na krive stvari. Bila je vrlo produktivna. Želio je procijeniti N, broj komunikativnih civilizacija u našoj galaksiji. I uključio je brzinu stvaranja zvijezda, faktor planeta, i krucijalno, inteligenciju.
I think that's the wrong way to think about it. Intelligence appears all over the place, in all kinds of guises. Human intelligence is only one kind of a thing. But what's really important is the replicators you have and the levels of replicators, one feeding on the one before. So, I would suggest that we don't think intelligence, we think replicators.
Mislim da je to krivi način razmišljanja o tome. Inteligencija se pojavljuje posvuda, u svakakvim krinkama. Ljudska inteligencija je samo jedna vrsta. Ali stvarno bitni su replikatori koje imate i razine replikatora, koji se hrane onim prethodnim. Sugerirala bih da ne razmišljamo o inteligenciji, nego o replikatorima.
And on that basis, I've suggested a different kind of equation. A very simple equation. N, the same thing, the number of communicative civilizations out there [that] we might expect in our galaxy. Just start with the number of planets there are in our galaxy. The fraction of those which get a first replicator. The fraction of those that get the second replicator. The fraction of those that get the third replicator. Because it's only the third replicator that's going to reach out -- sending information, sending probes, getting out there, and communicating with anywhere else.
Na toj osnovi, predložila sam drukčiju vrstu jednadžbe. Vrlu jednostavnu jednadžbu. N, ista stvar. broj komunikativnih civilizacija, koje možemo očekivati u galaksiji. Samo počnimo s brojem planeta koji su u našoj galaksiji. Udio onih koji dobiju prvi replikator. Udio onih koje dobiju drugi replikator. Udio onih koje dobiju treći replikator. Zato što će jedino treći replikator posegnuti -- slati informacije, slati sonde, izlaziti van, i komunicirati sa bilo kime.
OK, so if we take that equation, why haven't we heard from anybody out there? Because every step is dangerous. Getting a new replicator is dangerous. You can pull through, we have pulled through, but it's dangerous. Take the first step, as soon as life appeared on this earth. We may take the Gaian view. I loved Peter Ward's talk yesterday -- it's not Gaian all the time. Actually, life forms produce things that kill themselves. Well, we did pull through on this planet.
Ako uzmemo tu jednadžbu, zašto nismo čuli ništa od nikoga vani? Zato što je svaki korak opasan. Nastanak novog replikatora je opasan. Možemo se provući, mi smo se provukli, ali je opasno. Uzmimo prvi korak, čim se život pojavio na zemlji. Uzmimo Gajanski pogled. Svidio mi se Peter Wardov govor jučer -- nije Gajanski cijelo vrijeme. Zapravo, život stvara stvari koje se same ubijaju. Pa, mi se jesmo provukli na ovom planetu.
But then, a long time later, billions of years later, we got the second replicator, the memes. That was dangerous, all right. Think of the big brain. How many mothers do we have here? You know all about big brains. They are dangerous to give birth to, are agonizing to give birth to. (Laughter) My cat gave birth to four kittens, purring all the time. Ah, mm -- slightly different. (Laughter)
Ali onda, mnogo kasnije, milijarde godina kasnije, dobili smo drugi replikator, meme. To je bilo stvarno opasno. Razmislite o velikom mozgu. Koliko majki ovdje imamo? Znate sve o velikim mozgovima. Opasni su za rađanje. Grozni su za rađanje. (Smijeh) Moja mačka je rodila predući cijelo vrijeme. Malo drukčije. (Smijeh)
But not only is it painful, it kills lots of babies, it kills lots of mothers, and it's very expensive to produce. The genes are forced into producing all this myelin, all the fat to myelinate the brain. Do you know, sitting here, your brain is using about 20 percent of your body's energy output for two percent of your body weight? It's a really expensive organ to run. Why? Because it's producing the memes.
Ali nije samo bolno, ubija mnogo djece, ubija mnogo majki, i vrlo skupo za proizvesti. Geni su prisiljeni proizvoditi sav taj mijelin, svu tu mast kako bi mijelinirali mozak. Sjedeći ovdje, vaš mozak koristi oko 20 posto vaše tjelesne energije za 2 posto vaše tjelesne mase. To je skupi organ za korištenje. Zašto? Zato jer stvara meme.
Now, it could have killed us off. It could have killed us off, and maybe it nearly did, but you see, we don't know. But maybe it nearly did. Has it been tried before? What about all those other species? Louise Leakey talked yesterday about how we're the only one in this branch left. What happened to the others? Could it be that this experiment in imitation, this experiment in a second replicator, is dangerous enough to kill people off?
Mogao nas je pobiti, i možda skoro jest, ali ne znamo. Ali možda skoro jest. Je li pokušano prije? Što sa svim ostalim vrstama? Louis Leakey je pričala jučer o tome kako smo jedini preostali u ovoj grani. Što se dogodilo drugima? Je li moguće da je ovaj eksperiment imitacije, ovaj eksperiment drugog replikatora, dovoljno opasan da pobije ljude?
Well, we did pull through, and we adapted. But now, we're hitting, as I've just described, we're hitting the third replicator point. And this is even more dangerous -- well, it's dangerous again. Why? Because the temes are selfish replicators and they don't care about us, or our planet, or anything else. They're just information, why would they? They are using us to suck up the planet's resources to produce more computers, and more of all these amazing things we're hearing about here at TED. Don't think, "Oh, we created the Internet for our own benefit." That's how it seems to us. Think, temes spreading because they must. We are the old machines.
Pa, provukli smo se, i prilagodili smo se. Ali sada se približavamo, kao što sam opisala, točki trećeg replikatora. I ovo je još opasnije -- ponovno je opasno. Zašto? Zato što su temi sebični replikatori. i ne mare za nas, ili naš planet, ili išta drugo. Oni su samo informacija -- zašto bi? Iskorištavaju nas kako bi potrošili resurse planeta za proizvodnju više računala, i više ovih fascinantnih stvari o kojima čujemo na TED-u. Nemojte misliti, "Stvorili smo Internet za našu korist." Tako nam se čini. Razmišljajte o temima kako se šire jer moraju. Mi smo stari strojevi.
Now, are we going to pull through? What's going to happen? What does it mean to pull through? Well, there are kind of two ways of pulling through. One that is obviously happening all around us now, is that the temes turn us into teme machines, with these implants, with the drugs, with us merging with the technology. And why would they do that? Because we are self-replicating. We have babies. We make new ones, and so it's convenient to piggyback on us, because we're not yet at the stage on this planet where the other option is viable. Although it's closer, I heard this morning, it's closer than I thought it was. Where the teme machines themselves will replicate themselves. That way, it wouldn't matter if the planet's climate was utterly destabilized, and it was no longer possible for humans to live here. Because those teme machines, they wouldn't need -- they're not squishy, wet, oxygen-breathing, warmth-requiring creatures. They could carry on without us.
Hoćemo li se provući? Što će se dogoditi? Što znači provući se? Postoje dva načina provlačenja. Jedan je onaj koji se upravo događa oko nas, da nas temi pretvore u temske strojeve, s tim implatantima, s drogama, s nama kako se stapamo s tehnologijom. Zašto bi oni to učinili? Zato jer se mi samorepliciramo. Imamo djecu. Radimo novu, pa je zato prikladno krpati nam se zato što još nismo na toj razini na ovom planetu gdje je druga opcija moguća. Iako je bliže, čula sam jutros, Bliže je nego što sam mislila da jest. Onda kada će se temski strojevi samoreplicirati. Tada ne bi bilo važno da se klima planeta potpuno destabilizira, i da nije moguć ljudski život. Jer ti temski strojevi, ne bi trebali -- nisu sluzavi, mokri, dišući, toplinski organizmi. Mogli bi nastaviti bez nas.
So, those are the two possibilities. The second, I don't think we're that close. It's coming, but we're not there yet. The first, it's coming too. But the damage that is already being done to the planet is showing us how dangerous the third point is, that third danger point, getting a third replicator. And will we get through this third danger point, like we got through the second and like we got through the first? Maybe we will, maybe we won't. I have no idea. (Applause) Chris Anderson: That was an incredible talk. SB: Thank you. I scared myself. CA: (Laughter)
Znači, to su dvije mogućnosti. Druga, ne mislim da smo tako blizu. Dolazi, ali nismo još stigli. Prva također dolazi. Ali šteta koja se već nanosi planeti nam pokazuje koliko je treća točka opasna ta treća točka, dolazak trećeg replikatora. Hoćemo li proći treću opasnu točku, kako smo prošli drugu i prvu? Možda hoćemo, možda nećemo. Ne znam. (Pljesak) Chris Anderson: To je bio sjajan govor. Hvala. Preplašila sam sebe. (Smijeh)