评论
打印
It's common to hear the criticism that the Metaverse is an inherently dystopic ideal.
人们经常听到这样的批评，即元宇宙本质上是一个反乌托邦的理想。
And the challenge, of course, with that is while many people are familiar with the term, there is disagreement over whether or not this is just some conquest to techno-feudalism, which is to say if big tech owns the atoms of the places that we work and, in some regard, own potentially the cryptocurrencies we're paid in, that we find ourselves in a form of 'virtual indentured servitude.'
当然，其中的挑战是，虽然许多人都很熟悉这个术语，但人们对它是否只是对技术封建主义的征服还存在争议，也就是说，如果大型科技公司掌握了我们工作场所的原子，并且在某种程度上可能拥有给我们支付报酬的加密货币，我们会发现自己处于一种“虚拟的契约奴役”中。
The fact that the Metaverse is being ushered in- or seems to be by big tech corporations, and that the term itself is originated from the dystopian science fiction novel, and all of its antecedents were largely dystopic in tone seem to reaffirm that hypothesis.
元宇宙似乎是由大型科技公司引进的，而这个词本身源于反乌托邦科幻小说，而且它所有的前身都是反乌托邦的，这一切都印证了这一假设。
I'm not convinced and, in fact, I would argue that the etymology, or the history of the term is the easiest one to disabuse.
但我并不相信，事实上，我会反驳道，这个术语的词源或历史是最容易纠正的。
So you'll find that the essence of most fiction is drama, and human drama tends to be the most satisfying.
你会发现，大多数小说的本质是戏剧，而人类的戏剧往往是最令人满意的。
There's a reason why you don't see many fictional novels set in utopias.
以乌托邦为背景的虚构小说很少见，这是有原因的。
They're not much fun; there's not much human exploration there.
它们很无趣；这种小说里面没有太多的人类探索。
And so yes, when you take a look at "Snow Crash," "Ready Player One," "The Matrix," most examples like that are dystopic.
是的，看看《雪崩》、《一号玩家》、《黑客帝国》，大多数这样的例子都是反乌托邦的。
But counterbalancing that are the actual experiences designed to realize the Metaverse.
但与之抗衡的是为实现虚拟世界而设计的实际体验。
Not just "Roblox" today, or "Second Life" in the 2000s, but the experiences that actually date back into the 70s, what we called, 'Multi-user shared hallucinations'- text-based virtual worlds.
不光是今天的“Roblox”，或者21世纪初的“Second Life”，实际上还可以追溯到70年代的体验，我们称之为“多用户共享幻觉”--基于文本的虚拟世界。
They were designed for totally different ideals.
它们是为完全不同的理想而设计的。
And that was fun, experimentation, exploration, communication- why?
这里面包含着趣味、实验、探索、交流--为什么呢？
Because, of course, no one's going to sign up, least of all stay in a virtual space that is dystopic.
因为自然没人会去注册，尤其是待在一个反乌托邦的虚拟空间里。
And so, I would argue that no matter how scary the term's origination is, the soon-to-be hundreds of billions of hours that have been spent in metaverse-like experiences spanning four generations of human history have had a totally different tone.
因此，我认为，无论这个词的起源有多可怕，人类历史上四代人在类似宇宙的经历中度过的即将到来的数千亿小时，已经完全变了基调。
Real-time-rendered virtual worlds and 3D simulations are largely limited to consumer leisure, a tiny portion of it at that.
实时渲染的虚拟世界和3D模拟在很大程度上仅限于消费者休闲领域，只占很小的一部分。
But that's actually a fun way to talk about one of the most frequent criticisms about the Metaverse, and that's that we will find ourselves isolated from one another, locked away in our homes with a VR headset strapped to our face, reluctant to ever do anything "real."
但用这种方式去谈论元宇宙最常见的批评之一其实很有趣，即我们会发现自己与他人隔绝，关在家里，戴着VR耳机，不愿去做任何“真实”的事情。
The truth is, the primary draw of time for the Metaverse is likely to be the dominant use of leisure time today-and that's television.
事实是，元宇宙最有可能占据的就是我们现在主要的休闲时间--看电视。
In the United States, 300 million Americans watch an average 5.5 hours per day of TV.
在美国，有3亿人平均每天看5.5小时的电视。
More than two-thirds of that time is done alone.
其中有三分之二的时间都是一个人在看。
Almost all of it is done sedentary.
几乎看电视的全程都是久坐不动的。
One of the reasons why I think the Metaverse is likely to have strongly positive impacts on society is just substituting time from a disengaged solitary activity to one that is active, that is social, that is designed for engagement.
我认为元宇宙可能会对社会产生强烈积极影响的原因之一是，它只是把时间从一种非参与性的、孤独的活动中拿走，去做一种活跃的、社交的、旨在参与的活动。
One of the most important ways to understand the positive effects of the Metaverse, or 3D-real-time rendering is to take a look at education.
要了解元宇宙或3D实时渲染的积极影响，最重要的方法之一是看看教育。
It remains deeply unequal globally, largely inaccessible to most, and geographically discriminatory.
在全球范围内，教育仍然严重不平等，大多数人基本上无法获得，而且在地理上存在歧视。
We hope that the Metaverse brings to life much of what we imagine "The Magic School Bus" to be.
我们希望元宇宙能让我们想象中的“神奇校车”重现生机。
We're visual and experiential learners.
我们是视觉和体验式的学习者。
But papier mache, baking soda, and vinegar for a volcano only goes so far.
但用纸质奶油、小苏打和醋做出来火山只有这么点规模。
We learn about physics today in a textbook.
如今我们都在课本上学习物理。
And yet, in these 3D environments you can download course packs right now from Epic or Roblox that allow you to build complex Rube Goldberg machines, see how gravity plays out under different Gs.
然而，在3D环境中，你可以从Epic或Roblox下载课程包，可以建造复杂的Rube Goldberg机器，看看重力在不同的加速度下是如何发挥作用的。
And these classes can be live-performed, they're infinitely re-playable, they're available to all, they have no marginal cost for delivery.
这些课程可以现场演绎，可以无限重复播放，所有人都能看到，没有边际成本。
I'm not saying it's a panacea- inequality of education and opportunity will endure- but I really do believe that these capabilities significantly constrain that gap.
当然，它也不是万能的--教育和机会的不平等依然会存在--但我真的相信，这些能力可以显著地控制这种差距。
At the end of the day, the Metaverse will be what we make it: who runs it, how they run it, the ways in which society is, and is not integrated into it, it's democratic and non-democratic nature, those are up to us.
归根结底，元宇宙是我们创造出来的：谁经营它，他们如何经营它，社会是否与其融合在一起，它的民主和非民主本质，这些都取决于我们。
The Metaverse is coming, there's no turning around on 3D-real-time rendering on graphics-based computing.
元宇宙即将问世，基于图形计算的3D实时渲染势在必行。
If there's an organic desire for a new interface we're going to go there.
如果人们出现了有对新界面的有机需求，我们就一定会实现它。
But if we, the constituents, don't want it to be dystopic but, more importantly, if we want it to be a strong force for good in a way over the last 15 years maybe it wasn't, we need to be educated, we need to lean in, not resist.
但如果我们这些选民不希望它是反乌托邦的，但更重要的是，如果我们希望它成为一股强大的向善的力量（过去15年里它并没有做到），那我们就需要接受教育，要迎接它，而不是抗拒它。
