第一篇：ted演講 科技并沒有改變愛為什么？

TED演講

科技并沒有改變愛，為什么？

演說者：Helen Fisher演說題目：科技并沒有改變愛，為什么？在這個科技導(dǎo)向、互連的世界，我們發(fā)展出求愛新招及新規(guī)則，然而愛的本質(zhì)卻不曾改變，Helen 如是說。她在這場活力充沛、巨細(xì)靡遺的演講中，以第一手資料解釋：更快速度的連結(jié)反而產(chǎn)生步調(diào)更慢、更親密的關(guān)系。

科技并沒有改變愛，為什么？ 來自TED英語演說

00:00 19:13

I was recently traveling in the Highlandsof New Guinea, and I was talking with a man who had three wives.I asked him,'How many wives would you like to have?' And there was this longpause, and I thought to myself, 'Is he going to say five? Is he going tosay 10? Is he going to say 25?' And he leaned towards me and he whispered,'None.'最近，我正在新幾內(nèi)亞高地旅行我訪談了一位有三個老婆的人我問他：“你想要多少個老婆？”他停頓了很長時間我就想 “他會說5個？還是10個？或許是25個呢？“” 結(jié)果他靠過來 小聲說道：“一個都不想要。”

Eighty-six percent of human societiespermit a man to have several wives: polygyny.But in the vast majority of thesecultures, only about five or ten percent of men actually do have several wives.Having several partners can be a toothache.In fact, co-wives can fight witheach other, sometimes they can even poison each other's children.And you'vegot to have a lot of cows, a lot of goats, a lot of money, a lot of land, inorder to build a harem.當(dāng)今，86%的人類社會允許男人有好幾個妻子：一夫多妻。但在大多數(shù)這些社會中，有多個妻子的男性僅達(dá)5%~10%。有多個伴侶可是件頭疼的事。事實(shí)上，妻子們之間會產(chǎn)生爭執(zhí)，有時甚至?xí)竞Ψ降暮⒆印６夷惚仨毜糜泻芏嗟呐Ｑ虼罅拷疱X和土地，才能建立起一個妻妾成群的閨房。

We are a pair-bonding species.Ninety-sevenpercent of mammals do not pair up to rear their young;human beings do.I'm notsuggesting that we're not--that we're necessarily sexually faithful to ourpartners.I've looked at adultery in 42 cultures, I understand, actually, someof the genetics of it, and some of the brain circuitry of it.It's very commonaround the world, but we are built to love.我們是雙紐帶的種群。97%的哺乳動物不用成雙成對地?fù)嵊齼号祟悈s是這樣的。我并不是建議人類在性方面無需忠誠彼此，但在研究了42種文化中的外遇行為之后，我明白了，其中有基因的原因，而有一些則是大腦回路的問題，整個世界都非常普遍，但愛是我們與生俱來的能力。

How is technology changing love? I'm goingto say almost not at all.I study the brain.I and my colleagues have put over100 people into a brain scanner--people who had just fallen happily in love,people who had just been rejected in love and people who are in love long-term.And it is possible to remain 'in love' long-term.科技改變了愛嗎？我認(rèn)為沒有。我從事大腦研究，我和我的同事們對100多人進(jìn)行了大腦掃描，包括那些剛剛陷入愛情的人、在愛情里受挫的人以及長期沉浸在愛之中的人。是的，長期處于熱戀期是有可能的。

And I've long agomaintained that we've evolved three distinctly different brain systems formating and reproduction: sex drive, feelings of intense romantic love andfeelings of deep cosmic attachment to a long-term partner.And together, thesethree brain systems--with many other parts of the brain--orchestrate oursexual, our romantic and our family lives.很早之前我就說過人類在求愛和繁殖過程中進(jìn)化出了三個截然不同的大腦系統(tǒng)：性驅(qū)動、感受濃烈的浪漫以及對長期伴侶深層的強(qiáng)烈的依賴感。這三種大腦系統(tǒng)和大腦中的其他部分結(jié)合起來，控制著人類性、愛情以及家庭生活。

But they lie way below the cortex, waybelow the limbic system where we feel our emotions, generate our emotions.Theylie in the most primitive parts of the brain, linked with energy, focus,craving, motivation, wanting and drive.In this case, the drive to win life'sgreatest prize: a mating partner.They evolved over 4.4 million years ago amongour first ancestors, and they're not going to change if you swipe left or righton Tinder.但它們深藏在皮層下，在邊緣系統(tǒng)下，即人類感受情感發(fā)泄情緒的區(qū)域。它們位于大腦中最原始的位置，和能量、注意力、渴望度、動力、欲望及能動性相連。在這里便是為了贏得人生最大獎的動力：一位配偶。這些大腦系統(tǒng)早在440萬年前就從人類最早的祖先中演化而來，而不管你怎么在Tinder（社交軟件）上滑屏，它們都不會發(fā)生變化。

There's no question that technology ischanging the way we court: emailing, texting, emojis to express your emotions,sexting, 'liking' a photograph, selfies...We're seeing new rulesand taboos for how to court.But, you know--is this actually dramaticallychanging love? What about the late 1940s, when the automobile became verypopular and we suddenly had rolling bedrooms?可以肯定的一點(diǎn)是科技正在改變?nèi)祟惖那髳鄯绞健ｋ娮余]件、短信、表達(dá)情感的符號、色情短信、給照片或自拍點(diǎn)贊...關(guān)于如何求愛有了新的規(guī)則和禁忌，但是，這真的徹底改變了愛嗎？來看看上個世紀(jì)40年代，那時候汽車剛大行其道，頓時人們便有了“可移動臥室”。

How about the introduction of the birthcontrol pill? Unchained from the great threat of pregnancy and social ruin,women could finally express their primitive and primal sexuality.再來看看引進(jìn)避孕藥的時代，因?yàn)橐馔鈶言卸鴮?dǎo)致人生從此慘淡的日子一去不復(fù)返。女性終于可以釋放她們最原始的性本能。Even dating sites are not changing love.I'm Chief Scientific Advisor to Match.com, I've been it for 11 years.I keeptelling them and they agree with me, that these are not dating sites, they areintroducing sites.就連征婚網(wǎng)站的出現(xiàn)都沒有改變愛。我在Match.com作首席科學(xué)顧問已經(jīng)11年了，我一直宣導(dǎo)，而工作人員也認(rèn)同我的意見。即這并不是一個征婚網(wǎng)站，這是個介紹網(wǎng)站。

When you sit down in a bar, in a coffee house, on a parkbench, your ancient brain snaps into action like a sleeping cat awakened, andyou smile and laugh and listen and parade the way our ancestors did 100,000years ago.We can give you various people--all the dating sites can--butthe only real algorithm is your own human brain.Technology is not going tochange that.當(dāng)你走進(jìn)酒吧、咖啡館或坐在公園的長椅時，你的大腦會立即開始反應(yīng)，就像一只沉睡的貓被喚醒一樣。你開始微笑，大笑，試著傾聽，用那些早在10萬年前我們的祖先就使用的方式來炫耀。我們可以提供各式各樣的對象，所有的征婚網(wǎng)站都可以，但唯一真實(shí)的算法卻是你的大腦，科技改變不了這一點(diǎn)。Technology is also not going to change whoyou choose to love.I study the biology of personality, and I've come tobelieve that we've evolved four very broad styles of thinking and behaving,linked with the dopamine, serotonin, testosterone and estrogen systems.同樣它也改變不了你的擇偶對象。我研究生物心理學(xué)，我開始相信人類已經(jīng)進(jìn)化出了四個廣義的思考及行為方式，和多巴胺、血清素、睪丸激素和雌激素系統(tǒng)相關(guān)聯(lián)。

So Icreated a questionnaire directly from brain science to measure the degree towhich you express the traits--the constellation of traits--linked with eachof these four brain systems.I then put that questionnaire on various datingsites in 40 countries.Fourteen million or more people have now taken thequestionnaire, and I've been able to watch who's naturally drawn to whom.于是，基于腦科學(xué)原理，我設(shè)計(jì)了一份問卷用來衡量人們表達(dá)特征的程度——各種特征——與這四種大腦系統(tǒng)的關(guān)聯(lián)性在40個國家的各種征婚網(wǎng)站上刊登了這份問卷。目前，已有1400多萬人參與了問卷調(diào)查，我有幸可以觀察那些天生相互吸引的人。

And as it turns out, those who were veryexpressive of the dopamine system tend to be curious, creative, spontaneous,energetic--I would imagine there's an awful lot of people like that in thisroom--they're drawn to people like themselves.Curious, creative people needpeople like themselves.People who are very expressive of the serotonin systemtend to be traditional, conventional, they follow the rules, they respectauthority, they tend to be religious--religiosity is in the serotonin system--and traditional people go for traditional people.In that way, similarityattracts.結(jié)果是那些多巴胺系統(tǒng)反應(yīng)活躍的人更有好奇心，富有創(chuàng)意，自然率真，且精力充沛。我想現(xiàn)場在座肯定有很多人屬于這一類型，他們通常被同類人所吸引。好奇且有創(chuàng)意的人需要和同類在一起。那些血清素系統(tǒng)反應(yīng)活躍的人往往更加傳統(tǒng)，遵循慣例與規(guī)則，尊重權(quán)威 他們通常篤信宗教 —宗教信仰正屬于血清素系統(tǒng)— 傳統(tǒng)派自然找傳統(tǒng)派的人 如此一來，是同類相吸。In the other two cases, opposites attract.People very expressive ofthe testosterone system tend to be analytical, logical, direct, decisive, andthey go for their opposite: they go for somebody who's high estrogen, somebodywho's got very good verbal skills and people skills, who's very intuitive andwho's very nurturing and emotionally expressive.We have natural patterns ofmate choice.Modern technology is not going to change who we choose to love.而其他兩種情況則完全相反，對立性才有吸引力。睪丸激素系統(tǒng)反應(yīng)活躍的人通常善于分析、邏輯思維強(qiáng)、直接、果斷，而他們尋找的是和他們對立的人，那些雌激素高的人，他們語言能力很強(qiáng)、善于處理人際關(guān)系、憑直覺行事且善于照顧他人，且直抒胸懷。人類擇偶有自然模式，現(xiàn)代技術(shù)不會改變我們選擇的對象。

But technology is producing one moderntrend that I find particularly important.It's associated with the concept ofparadox of choice.For millions of years, we lived in little hunting andgathering groups.You didn't have the opportunity to choose between 1,000people on a dating site.但科技正在制造一種當(dāng)代潮流。我認(rèn)為它尤為重要。它和選擇悖論這一概念相關(guān)千萬年來，人類都生活在小型狩獵及采集社會，那時的人沒有機(jī)會在社交網(wǎng)站上千里挑一選擇對象。

In fact, I've been studying this recently, and Iactually think there's some sort of sweet spot in the brain;I don't know whatit is, but apparently, from reading a lot of the data, we can embrace aboutfive to nine alternatives, and after that, you get into what academics call'cognitive overload,' and you don't choose any.事實(shí)上，從我最近對此的研究來看，我認(rèn)為大腦中有某種“最佳狀態(tài)點(diǎn)”。雖然我并不知道在哪兒，但從大量數(shù)據(jù)來看人類只能接受大概5~9個選項(xiàng)。在此之后，會變成某些學(xué)者稱的“認(rèn)知超載”。結(jié)果是不再做出選擇。

So I've come to think that due to thiscognitive overload, we're ushering in a new form of courtship that I call'slow love.' I arrived at this during my work with Match.com.Everyyear for the last six years, we've done a study called 'Singles inAmerica.' We don't poll the Match population, we poll the Americanpopulation.We use 5,000-plus people, a representative sample of Americansbased on the US census.于是，我想正是由于這種認(rèn)知超載我們引進(jìn)了一種新型求愛方式，我稱其為“慢慢愛”。這些都是我在 Match.com工作時總結(jié)出來的。過去六年中，我們做了一項(xiàng)研究名為“美國單身” 我們民調(diào)的對象不僅針對Match.com的會員，而是整個美國人口。我們調(diào)查了5000多人，這是基于美國統(tǒng)計(jì)局的代表性樣本。We've got data now on over 30,000 people,and every single year, I see some of the same patterns.Every single year whenI ask the question, over 50 percent of people have had a one-night stand--notnecessarily last year, but in their lives--50 percent have had a friends withbenefits during the course of their lives, and over 50 percent have lived witha person long-term before marrying.目前已收集了超過3萬人的數(shù)據(jù)。每年我都看到同樣的模式，向他們提問的結(jié)果是超過50%的人有一夜情的經(jīng)歷，并不一定是上一年，而是他們一生中，在他們的有生之年50%的人曾經(jīng)和朋友上過床。超過50%的人在婚前有過長期同居的經(jīng)歷。Americans think that this is reckless.Ihave doubted that for a long time;the patterns are too strong.There's got tobe some Darwinian explanation--Not that many people are crazy.美國人認(rèn)為這是輕率的行為，但我一直不這么認(rèn)為，畢竟這種模式太普遍，肯定有某種類似于達(dá)爾文生物進(jìn)化的地方。總不會是那么多人都喪失了理智？

And I stumbled, then, on a statistic thatreally came home to me.It was a very interesting academic article in which Ifound that 67 percent of singles in America today who are living long-term withsomebody, have not yet married because they are terrified of divorce.They'reterrified of the social, legal, emotional, economic consequences of divorce.So I came to realize that I don't think this is recklessness;I think it'scaution.結(jié)果我發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個震驚的數(shù)據(jù)，一篇極其有趣的學(xué)術(shù)文章發(fā)現(xiàn)67%的處于長期同居的美國未婚人士，之所以還未結(jié)婚是因?yàn)閾?dān)心離婚。他們擔(dān)心離婚后面對的社會、法律、情感以及經(jīng)濟(jì)后果。于是 我認(rèn)識到這并不是輕率的行為，而是謹(jǐn)慎。Today's singles want to know every single thing about a partner beforethey wed.You learn a lot between the sheets, not only about how somebody makeslove, but whether they're kind, whether they can listen and at my age, whetherthey've got a sense of humor.如今，人們在結(jié)婚之前想對其伴侶的每一個細(xì)節(jié)了如指掌，同居能讓人了解到許多事情，不僅是對方的床上功夫，而是對方是否善良、是否善于傾聽以及到了我這個年紀(jì)所關(guān)心的，就是對方是否有幽默感。

And in an age where we have too manychoices, we have very little fear of pregnancy and disease and we've got nofeeling of shame for sex before marriage, I think people are taking their timeto love.當(dāng)今社會人們有很多選擇，很少為懷孕或疾病感到擔(dān)憂。且對婚前性行為毫無愧疚感，在這種情況下人們選擇愛得慢一些。

And actually, what's happening is, whatwe're seeing is a real expansion of the precommitment stage before you tie theknot.Where marriage used to be the beginning of a relationship, now it's thefinale.But the human brain--而真實(shí)情況是這其實(shí)是婚前準(zhǔn)備階段的實(shí)際延伸。從前，婚姻意味著一段感情的開始。而現(xiàn)在它意味著尾聲，但人類大腦

The human brain always triumphs, andindeed, in the United States today, 86 percent of Americans will marry by age49.And even in cultures around the world where they're not marrying as often,they are settling down eventually with a long-term partner.人類大腦總是勝出者。如今，在美國 86%的美國人將在49歲結(jié)婚，即便在世界上結(jié)婚率不高的文化里，最終他們也會和長期伴侶安定下來。So it began to occur to me: during this longextension of the precommitment stage, if you can get rid of bad relationshipsbefore you marry, maybe we're going to see more happy marriages.So I did astudy of 1,100 married people in America--not on Match.com, of course--andI asked them a lot of questions.But one of the questions was, 'Would youre-marry the person you're currently married to?' And 81 percent said,'Yes.'于是我突然想到：在這個長期婚前準(zhǔn)備期，如果你在婚前擺脫了一段糟糕的情感關(guān)系或許就會有更多美滿的婚姻。于是，我研究了美國1100位已婚人士，當(dāng)然不是在Match.com上。我問了很多問題其中一個是如果再給你一次機(jī)會，你還會選擇和現(xiàn)在的伴侶結(jié)婚嗎？ 81%的人說，會！In fact, the greatest change in modernromance and family life is not technology.It's not even slow love.It's actuallywomen piling into the job market in cultures around the world.For millions ofyears, our ancestors lived in little hunting and gathering groups.Womencommuted to work to gather their fruits and vegetables.They came home with 60to 80 percent of the evening meal.The double-income family was the rule.Andwomen were regarded as just as economically, socially and sexually powerful asmen.事實(shí)上當(dāng)今的情感和家庭生活最大的變化不是科技造成的，甚至也不是“慢慢愛”的結(jié)果。而是在全世界范圍內(nèi)大量女性進(jìn)入職場的結(jié)果。幾百萬年以來我們的祖先都生活在小型捕獵采集社會，女性忙于采摘，餐桌上60%~80%的食物是由她們帶回來的。雙份收入家庭是一般法則，女性不論在經(jīng)濟(jì)、社會還是性方面都和男性具有同等的地位。

Then the environment changed some 10,000years ago, we began to settle down on the farm and both men and women becameobliged, really, to marry the right person, from the right background, from theright religion and from the right kin and social and political connections.Men's jobs became more important: they had to move the rocks, fell the trees,plow the land.They brought the produce to local markets, and came home withthe equivalent of money.然而大約1萬年前社會發(fā)生了變化，人類開始以農(nóng)耕為主，男女似乎有義務(wù)尋找合適的人結(jié)婚。對方必須有匹配的背景、宗教信仰、相稱的家族、社會及政治關(guān)聯(lián)。男性的工作變得更為重要，他們必須搬運(yùn)大石、砍樹、耕地，他們把農(nóng)產(chǎn)品帶到市場上賣換回來同等的錢。

Along with this, we see a rise of a host ofbeliefs: the belief of virginity at marriage, arranged marriages--strictlyarranged marriages--the belief that the man is the head of the household,that the wife's place is in the home and most important, honor thy husband, and'til death do us part.These are gone.They are going, and in many places, theyare gone.不僅如此，各種信仰開始傳播。堅(jiān)信婚前必須保持處女身包辦婚姻（嚴(yán)格安排的婚姻）、堅(jiān)信男性是一家之主女性就應(yīng)該待在家里更重要的一點(diǎn)。女性一生一世必須尊夫所有這些都是過去式了，有些地方仍有這些現(xiàn)象，但大部分地區(qū)這些現(xiàn)象都不復(fù)存在了。

We are right now in a marriage revolution.We are shedding 10,000 years of our farming tradition and moving forwardtowards egalitarian relationships between the sexes--something I regard ashighly compatible with the ancient human spirit.我們正處于一場婚姻變革之中，我們摒棄了1萬年前的農(nóng)業(yè)傳統(tǒng)，朝著兩性平等的方向發(fā)展。我認(rèn)為這和遠(yuǎn)古人類的精神相契合。

I'm not a Pollyanna;there's a great dealto cry about.I've studied divorce in 80 cultures, I've studied, as I say,adultery in many--there's a whole pile of problems.As William Butler Yeats,the poet, once said, 'Love is the crooked thing.' I would add,'Nobody gets out alive.'我不是一個盲目樂觀的人，還有很多事情值得擔(dān)憂。我研究了80種文化里的離婚行為、出軌行為還有許許多多的問題。正如詩人威廉·巴特勒·葉芝所說 “愛情是個狡猾的家伙” 我會再加一句，“沒人能活著出來”。

We all have problems.But in fact, I thinkthe poet Randall Jarrell really sums it up best.He said, 'The dark,uneasy world of family life--where the greatest can fail, and the humblestsucceed.'每個人都有困擾，但我認(rèn)為詩人蘭德爾·賈雷爾總結(jié)的最好他說：在枯燥繁瑣的家庭生活中強(qiáng)者不顯其智，弱者反而取勝。But I will leave you with this: love andattachment will prevail, technology cannot change it.And I will conclude bysaying any understanding of human relationships must take into account one themost powerful determinants of human behavior: the unquenchable, adaptable andprimordial human drive to love.但我想說的是：愛和相互依賴會戰(zhàn)勝一切，科技無法改變這一點(diǎn)。總結(jié)下來，便是任何對人類關(guān)系的詮釋必須考慮到人類行為，最強(qiáng)大的決定因素是那難以抑制的極具適應(yīng)性的最原始的愛的動力。

Kelly Stoetzel: Thank you so much for that,Helen.As you know, there's another speaker here with us that works in yoursame field.She comes at it from a different perspective.Esther Perel is apsychotherapist who works with couples.You study data, Esther studies thestories the couples tell her when they come to her for help.Let's have herjoin us on the stage.Esther?Kelly Stoetzel：感謝您的演講。海倫，今天還有另一位演講者，她和您在相同的領(lǐng)域里做研究，不過是從不同的視角來分析問題。誒斯特·佩雷斯從事情侶心理治療師的工作，您研究數(shù)據(jù)，誒斯特研究那些向她尋求幫助的情侶們所訴說的故事。現(xiàn)在請她上臺吧，有請誒斯特。

So Esther, when you were watching Helen'stalk, was there any part of it that resonated with you through the lens of yourown work that you'd like to comment on?誒斯特當(dāng)您觀看海倫演講的時候是否有和您所做的工作產(chǎn)生共鳴的地方？您可以和我們說說嘛？

Esther Perel: It's interesting, because onthe one hand, the need for love is ubiquitous and universal.But the way welove--the meaning we make out of it--the rules that govern our relationships,I think, are changing fundamentally.Esther Perel：讓我覺得有意思的地方是，一方面，人們對愛的需求無所不在，無所不及但人類愛的方式愛與被愛背后的意義，以及控制雙方關(guān)系的規(guī)則正在發(fā)生根本性的改變。

We come from a model that, until now, wasprimarily regulated around duty and obligation, the needs of the collective andloyalty.And we have shifted it to a model of free choice and individualrights, and self-fulfillment and happiness.And so, that was the first thing Ithought, that the need doesn't change, but the context and the way we regulatethese relationships changes a lot.直到最近我們一直處于一種模式，即主要由責(zé)任和義務(wù)集體和忠誠主義支配的模式。而現(xiàn)在，我們轉(zhuǎn)向了另一種模式即追崇自主選擇、個人權(quán)利、自我實(shí)現(xiàn)與幸福的模式，這是我腦子里冒出的第一個想法，愛的需求沒有改變，但大環(huán)境和人們處理情感關(guān)系的方式發(fā)生了很大的變化。

On the paradox of choice--you know, onthe one hand we relish the novelty and the playfulness, I think, to be able tohave so many options.And at the same time, as you talk about this cognitiveoverload, I see many, many people who...who dread the uncertainty andself-doubt that comes with this massa of choice, creating a case of'FOMO' and then leading us--FOMO, fear of missed opportunity, orfear of missing out--it's like, 'How do I know I have found 'the one'--the right one?'關(guān)于選擇悖論我認(rèn)為一方面我們追求多重選擇給我們帶來的新鮮感和趣味性，同時，就像你提到的“認(rèn)知負(fù)荷” 我看到許多人對堆砌成堆的選項(xiàng)所帶來的不確定性和不自信而感到擔(dān)憂，從而制造出某種“害怕錯過的恐懼癥” 于是便引領(lǐng)我們--“FOMO”，表現(xiàn)為害怕機(jī)會流失，就好比“我怎么知道這個人就是我命中注定的那一個呢？”

So we've created what I call this thing of'stable ambiguity.' Stable ambiguity is when you are too afraid to bealone but also not really willing to engage in intimacy-building.It's a set oftactics that kind of prolong the uncertainty of a relationship but also theuncertainty of the breakup.與人建立親密關(guān)系。這是一種策略，不僅會使這段關(guān)系的不確定性期延長，還能拖延分手的不確定性。

So, here on the internet you have three major ones.One is icing and simmering, which are great stalling tactics that offer a kindof holding pattern that emphasizes the undefined nature of a relationship butat the same time gives you enough of a comforting consistency and enough freedomof the undefined boundaries.網(wǎng)絡(luò)上將其分為三個階段：一是冰凍期和溫吞水，這是很好的拖延戰(zhàn)術(shù)，它使人們處于某種停滯狀態(tài)。在這種狀態(tài)下，強(qiáng)調(diào)情感關(guān)系中的不界定屬性但同時能讓你維持這段關(guān)系以及自由做出選擇的空間。Yeah?對嗎？

And then comes ghosting.And ghosting is,basically, you disappear from this massa of texts on the spot, and you don'thave to deal with the pain that you inflict on another, because you're makingit invisible even to yourself.接下來就到了“幽靈階段”。“幽靈階段”基本上是指你突然不再做出選擇、不再應(yīng)對你給對方帶來的痛苦，因?yàn)槟阕约憾佳诙I鈴。Yeah?說的對嗎？

So I was thinking--these words came upfor me as I was listening to you, like how a vocabulary also creates a reality,and at the same time, that's my question to you: Do you think when the contextchanges, it still means that the nature of love remains the same?這種現(xiàn)象我稱為“穩(wěn)定的模棱兩可”。指的是你害怕被剩下來孤獨(dú)終老，但又不愿打開心扉。當(dāng)我在聽你演講的時候我想到了這些，正如語言重現(xiàn)現(xiàn)實(shí)一樣。與此同時，我也有個問題要問你：當(dāng)環(huán)境發(fā)生變化時，你認(rèn)為愛的本質(zhì)還是一樣的嗎？

You study the brain and I study people'srelationships and stories, so I think it's everything you say, plus.But Idon't always know the degree to which a changing context...Does it at somepoint begin to change--If the meaning changes, does it change the need, or isthe need clear of the entire context?你研究大腦，而我研究情侶關(guān)系。我認(rèn)可你的觀點(diǎn)，但我不明白的是環(huán)境改變的程度——它是從某一點(diǎn)開始改變的呢？如果意義變了，需求是否也會改變呢？或需求本身不受整個大環(huán)境影響？ HF: Wow!Well--海倫：哇！

Well, I've got three points here, right?First of all, to your first one: there's no question that we've changed, thatwe now want a person to love, and for thousands of years, we had to marry theright person from the right background and right kin connection.And in fact,in my studies of 5,000 people every year, I ask them, 'What are youlooking for?' And every single year, over 97 percent say--海倫：好的，我分為三點(diǎn)來說首先，回答你第一個問題：人類變了，這一點(diǎn)毋庸置疑現(xiàn)在人們依然渴望愛情。而幾千年來人們都遵從必須和來自匹配的背景和關(guān)聯(lián)的人結(jié)婚，每年我對5000人進(jìn)行調(diào)研，我問他們：“你想找什么樣的人？” 每年超過97%的人會說。

海倫：是的。EP: The list grows--誒斯特：清單越來越長了吧？ HF: Well, no.The basic thing is over 97percent of people want somebody that respects them, somebody they can trust andconfide in, somebody who makes them laugh, somebody who makes enough time forthem and somebody who they find physically attractive.That never changes.Andthere's certainly--you know, there's two parts--海倫：呃，沒有。超過97%的人都表示想找尊重自己、值得信任的、能交心的、能逗你笑的、花時間陪自己的以及長相看著順眼的人。這幾點(diǎn)從未改變過，大概有兩部分--EP: But you know how I call that? That'snot what people used to say--誒斯特：你知道我怎么定義這種現(xiàn)象嗎？過去人們并不是這樣的擇偶標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。HF: That's exactly right.EP: They said they wanted somebody withwhom they have companionship, economic support, children.We went from aproduction economy to a service economy.We did it in the larger culture, and we'redoing it in marriage.誒斯特：過去人們會說他們想找能夠與自己作伴、提供經(jīng)濟(jì)支持、喜愛孩子的人，我們從生產(chǎn)經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榉?wù)經(jīng)濟(jì)。在其他文化中我們已經(jīng)這么做了，現(xiàn)在我們把它帶到婚姻中。HF: Right, no question about it.But it'sinteresting, the millennials actually want to be very good parents, whereas thegeneration above them wants to have a very fine marriage but is not as focusedon being a good parent.You see all of these nuances.海倫：是的，這一點(diǎn)毫無疑問但有趣的是，如今千禧一代非常渴望成為合格的家長，而他們的上一代人希望有個美滿的婚姻，但卻不向他們一樣專注于成為合格的家長，你可以看到這些細(xì)微的差別。

There's two basic parts of personality:there's your culture--everything you grew up to do and believe and say--andthere's your temperament.Basically, what I've been talking about is yourtemperament.And that temperament is certainly going to change with changingtimes and changing beliefs.人格有兩個基本構(gòu)成部分：你的文化、成長過程信仰和言行以及性格，我討論的基本上都是性格。而性格一定會隨著時間和信仰的改變而改變。

And in terms of the paradox of choice,there's no question about it that this is a pickle.There were millions ofyears where you found that sweet boy at the other side of the water hole, andyou went for it.就選擇悖論而言這確實(shí)是個兩難的境地。千百萬年以來，如果人們在河邊看到心動的對象，便會去爭取。EP: Yes, but you--誒斯特：是的，但是--HF: I do want to say one more thing.Thebottom line is, in hunting and gathering societies, they tended to have two orthree partners during the course of their lives.They weren't square!And I'mnot suggesting that we do, but the bottom line is, we've always hadalternatives.Mankind is always--in fact, the brain is well-built to what wecall 'equilibrate,' to try and decide: Do I come, do I stay? Do I go,do I stay? What are the opportunities here? How do I handle this there? And soI think we're seeing another play-out of that now.海倫：還有一件事歸根結(jié)底，在狩獵及采集社會中，人們一生中通常有2到3個伴侶他們并不是兩兩相對的。我當(dāng)然不是建議我們也這么做，但重要的是我們始終可以做出其他選擇。人類一直如此，實(shí)際上，人類大腦的構(gòu)造是平衡對稱的，去試探或下決心：來或走？去或留？留下來有什么樣的機(jī)遇？怎么處理這件事？我想現(xiàn)在上演的正是大腦決策的另一出戲。

KS: Well, thank you both so much.I thinkyou're going to have a million dinner partners for tonight!KS：非常感謝兩位。我想你今晚要和很多人共進(jìn)晚餐了。

(Applause)Thank you, thank you.（掌聲）謝謝！

第二篇：《科技改變生活》演講

科技改變生活

親愛的老師同學(xué)們，大家早上好，我是??，今天我演講的題目是《科技改變生活》。

工業(yè)化與信息化的發(fā)展，推動了科學(xué)技術(shù)的進(jìn)步，而這些日新月異科學(xué)技術(shù)的，也越來越多地滲透到我們的生活和學(xué)習(xí)之中:通訊技術(shù)的發(fā)展，使溝通不再困難；網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)的發(fā)展，讓資源實(shí)現(xiàn)了全球性的共享；智能設(shè)備的發(fā)展，改變了人類的生活方式。我們每天都生活并享受在科技的成果中。生活無處不體現(xiàn)著科技的進(jìn)步。

人類得益于科技，科技則源于創(chuàng)新。然而，創(chuàng)新并不是遙不可及的。當(dāng)你欣喜若狂地解出一道數(shù)學(xué)題時，可否想到還有另一種解法？當(dāng)你面對節(jié)約用水的傳統(tǒng)對策時，可否想到還有更好的措施？生活用品、學(xué)習(xí)用具的小改進(jìn)就是創(chuàng)造。創(chuàng)新就是這樣一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)培養(yǎng)起來的。在科技中，往往一個小小的創(chuàng)新就能誕生一個新的偉大的發(fā)明。

“科學(xué)技術(shù)是第一生產(chǎn)力”，它是一個民族進(jìn)步的靈魂，是國家興旺發(fā)達(dá)的不竭動力。同學(xué)們，今后讓我們努力學(xué)習(xí)科學(xué)知識，勤于觀察，勇于探索，用創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)綴人生，讓科技融入理想！

我的演講完畢，謝謝大家！

第三篇：Photos-that-changed-the-world(改變世界的照片TED演講)

Photos that changed the world Good moring,everyone.My name is Xiehonglan,I come from Fuzhou, the capital city of Fujian province.It faces the island of Taiwan,off the China coast.This area nurtures many eminent scholars and politicians of the Chinese contemporary history,such as Yanfu,BinXing and Lin Zexu.I love my city.I graduated from Nankai University.Today my topic is Photos that changed the world To start with, I want to ask a question.Do you believe images can change the world? However, the truth is that we know that the images themselves don’t change the world, but we are also aware that, since the beginning of photography, images have provoked reactions in people, and those reactions have caused change to happen.So let’s begin with a group of images, they are so well-known, you might even recognize them in a different form.But I think we are looking for something more.We are looking for images that shine an uncompromising light on crucial issues, images that transcend borders, that transcend religions, images that provoke us to step up and do something.In other words, to act.Well, this image, you have all seen.It changed our view of the physical world.We have never seen our planet from this perspective before.Many people credit a lot of the birth of the environmental movement to our seeing the planet like this for the first time, its smallness, its fragility.40 years later, this groupare aware of the destructive power that our species can wield over our environment.These images taken by Brent Stirton in the Congo, these gorillas were murdered, some would even say crucified, and unsurprisingly, they sparked international outrage.Now, images have power to shed light of understanding on suspicion, ignorance, and in particularthe issue of HIV/AIDS.In the 1980s, people avoided talking about the disease.A simple act, in 1987, of the most famous woman in the world, the Princess of Wales, touching an HIV/AIDS infected baby, did a great deal, especially in Europe, to stop that.She, better than most, knew the power of an image.So when we are confronted by a powerful image, we all have a choice.We can look away, or we can address the image.Thankfully, when these photos appeared in the Guardian in 1998, they put a lot of focus and attention, and in the end, a lot of money, towards the Sudan famine relief efforts.Did the images change the world? No, but they had a major impact.Ansel Adams said, “you don’t take a photograph, you make it.” In my view, it’s not the photographer who makes the photo, it’s you.We bring to each image, our own values, our own belief systems, and as a result of that, the image resonates with us.

第四篇：TED演講

綠色未來（A Greener Future?）

大家好，我是Zach。從本周開始，我們將開展“TED演講主題介紹”系列，陸續(xù)為大家介紹TED演講的各類主題，方便大家更快地找到自己喜歡的TED演講。眾所周知，TED剛剛創(chuàng)辦時的焦點(diǎn)是集中在Technology（科技）, Entertainment（娛樂）和Design（設(shè)計(jì)）三方面。但隨著TED的成長和知名度的增加，TED演講所涵蓋的行業(yè)也越來越廣泛。為了確保讀者們不會在大量的演講中迷失了方向，TED網(wǎng)站貼心地將所有的演講分門別類，歸納到不同的主題中，既方便讀者們針對自己感興趣的內(nèi)容有選擇地觀看演講，也便于大家觀看和某一演講相關(guān)的其他內(nèi)容。

本系列的目的就是逐步地將已翻譯好的主題簡介帶給大家，并為大家推薦相關(guān)主題下的已翻譯演講、待翻譯演講和待校對演講。

本周為大家介紹的主題是–A Greener Future? 綠色未來

該主題在TED的網(wǎng)址是:

在TEDtoChina的網(wǎng)址是:

http:///themes/a_greener_future/

◎ 主題簡介

關(guān)于環(huán)境的辯論通常被定性為經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展和保護(hù)地球這兩種勢力間的較量。然而，大多數(shù)TED演講者堅(jiān)持魚和熊掌可以兼得的觀點(diǎn)——只要我們在處理環(huán)境問題時足夠聰明。

阿爾·戈?duì)栕鳛樾麄鳉夂蛭C(jī)的領(lǐng)軍人，堅(jiān)持人類可以通過細(xì)微處的改進(jìn)以在避免災(zāi)難的同時保持經(jīng)濟(jì)的活躍發(fā)展。建筑師威廉·麥克多納向人們展現(xiàn)了偉大設(shè)計(jì)的力量，它作用在整個文明體系上，而不僅僅是針對局部領(lǐng)域，并能持久地?fù)?dān)負(fù)起豐富的未來。馬約拉·卡特談及了她為曾陷入腐化的的紐約南布隆克斯區(qū)帶來綠色生機(jī)的工程。

愛德華·伯汀斯基關(guān)于環(huán)境損害和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的異常精致的攝影作品記錄了人類發(fā)展從未停滯的腳步。而生物學(xué)家愛德華·奧斯伯·威爾森向我們分享了他最大的心愿——人類社會團(tuán)結(jié)起來保護(hù)地球上的生命。

◎ 演講者推薦

阿爾·戈?duì)?Al Gore)：美國政治人物，曾于1993年至2001年間在比爾·克林頓掌政時擔(dān)任美國第四十五任副總統(tǒng)。其后升為一名國際上著名的環(huán)境學(xué)家，由

于在環(huán)球氣候變化與環(huán)境問題上的貢獻(xiàn)受到國際的肯定，因而與政府間氣候變化專門委員會共同獲得2007諾貝爾和平獎。

珍·古道爾(Jane Goodall)：英國生物學(xué)家、動物行為學(xué)家和著名動物保育人士。珍·古道爾長期致力于黑猩猩的野外研究，并取得豐碩成果。她的工作糾正了許多學(xué)術(shù)界對黑猩猩這一物種長期以來的錯誤認(rèn)識，揭示了許多黑猩猩社群中鮮為人知的秘密。除了對黑猩猩的研究，珍·古道爾還熱心投身于環(huán)境教育和公益事業(yè)，由她創(chuàng)建并管理的珍·古道爾研究會（國際珍古道爾協(xié)會）是著名民間動物保育機(jī)構(gòu)，在促進(jìn)黑猩猩保育、推廣動物福利、推進(jìn)環(huán)境和人道主義教育等領(lǐng)域進(jìn)行了很多卓有成效的工作，由珍·古道爾研究會創(chuàng)立的根與芽是目前全球最活躍的面向青年的環(huán)境教育計(jì)劃之一。由于珍·古道爾在黑猩猩研究和環(huán)境教育等領(lǐng)域的杰出貢獻(xiàn)，她在 1995年獲英國女王伊麗莎白二世榮封為皇家女爵士，在2002年獲頒聯(lián)合國和平使者。

（演講者簡介來自維基百科）

◎ 部分已翻譯演講（簡體中文）推薦：

1.阿爾·戈?duì)栮P(guān)于避免氣候危機(jī)的演講

“此次演講流露出的幽默感和人道主義跟在他的紀(jì)錄電影”難以忽視的真相“如出一轍，戈?duì)栮U明了15種應(yīng)對氣候危機(jī)立馬有效的方法而且簡單易行，從購買混合動力產(chǎn)品到發(fā)明新產(chǎn)品替代碳排放產(chǎn)品，使“全球溫室效應(yīng)”更加深入人心。”

2.阿力克斯·史蒂芬看望可持續(xù)發(fā)展的未來

“阿力克斯·史蒂芬是“改變世界”（Worldchanging.com）網(wǎng)站的創(chuàng)建人，他在這個演講中指出，減低人類生態(tài)足跡在當(dāng)下之意義尤為巨大，原因在于西方那一套生活方式將不能推廣到發(fā)展中國家，因?yàn)槟菢訉⑾拇罅康馁Y源。(因?yàn)槲鞣降哪且惶咨罘绞秸鸩酵茝V到發(fā)展中國家，進(jìn)一步加劇著資源的大量消耗。)”

3.Willie Smits 修復(fù)雨林

透過復(fù)雜的生態(tài)學(xué)，生物學(xué)家Willie Smits發(fā)掘一個重新植林的快捷方式，在婆羅洲救回了許多棲息于當(dāng)?shù)氐募t毛猩猩，進(jìn)而創(chuàng)造出一個得以修復(fù)脆弱生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的藍(lán)圖。

4.William McDonough 談「從搖籃到搖籃」理念

致力于環(huán)保的建筑師兼設(shè)計(jì)師 William McDonough 問，如果設(shè)計(jì)師心系所有子孫、所有物種、直到永遠(yuǎn)，我們的建筑及產(chǎn)品會是什么樣子？

5.查爾斯·摩爾：塑料充斥的海洋

查爾斯·摩爾船長是Algalita海洋研究基金會的創(chuàng)始人，他第一次發(fā)現(xiàn)了大太平洋垃圾帶——一片無邊無際漂浮著塑料垃圾的海域。現(xiàn)在，他為我們講述大海面臨的日益嚴(yán)重的塑料碎片污染問題。

◎ 待校對演講（簡體中文）推薦

1.Carl Honore praises slowness

“Journalist Carl Honore believes the Western world’s emphasis on speed erodes health, productivity and quality of life.But there’s a backlash brewing, as everyday people start putting the brakes on their all-too-modern lives.”

2.Kamal Meattle on how to grow fresh air

Researcher Kamal Meattle shows how an arrangement of three common houseplants, used in specific spots in a home or office building, can result in measurably cleaner indoor air.以上就是這個星期的TED主題介紹。希望大家能從上面的演講中有所收獲。大家也可以點(diǎn)擊這里的網(wǎng)址來查看所有該主題下演講的翻譯進(jìn)度（簡體中文和繁體中文）。

如果大家對此專欄有何建議的話，歡迎大家在下面留言，或是電郵至OTP at TEDtoChina dot com

我們下期再見。

第五篇：Ted演講

Ralph Langner談21世紀(jì)電子武器Stuxnet揭密

關(guān)于這場演講

Stuxnet計(jì)算機(jī)蠕蟲于2010年首次被發(fā)現(xiàn)，帶來了令人費(fèi)解的謎團(tuán)。除了它不尋常且高度復(fù)雜的編碼以外，還隱藏著一個更令人不安的謎團(tuán)：它的攻擊目標(biāo)。Ralph Langner及其團(tuán)隊(duì)協(xié)助破解Stuxnet編碼，找出這個數(shù)字彈頭的最終攻擊目標(biāo)－以及其幕后源頭。經(jīng)使用計(jì)算機(jī)數(shù)字鑒識方法深入檢視后，他解釋了其運(yùn)作原理。

關(guān)于Ralph Langner

Ralph Langner是德國控制系統(tǒng)的安全顧問。他對Stuxnet惡意軟件的分析受到全球矚目。

為什么要聽他演講

Ralph Langner為獨(dú)立網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全公司Langner的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者，專營控制系統(tǒng)－監(jiān)控和調(diào)控其它設(shè)備的電子裝置，如生產(chǎn)設(shè)備。這些裝置與運(yùn)作我們城市和國家的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施有密切關(guān)系，這使它們逐漸成為一場新興且具高度復(fù)雜型態(tài)的電子戰(zhàn)爭攻擊目標(biāo)。自2010年起，當(dāng)Stuxnet計(jì)算機(jī)蠕蟲首次現(xiàn)身時，Langner堅(jiān)決地投身于這個戰(zhàn)場。

身為致力于譯碼這個神秘程序的一份子，Langner和他的團(tuán)隊(duì)分析Stuxnet的數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)，并找出他認(rèn)為其最終的攻擊目標(biāo)：運(yùn)行于核工廠離心機(jī)的控制系統(tǒng)軟件－特別是伊朗的核工廠。Langner進(jìn)一步分析，發(fā)現(xiàn)Stuxnet可能的幕后源頭，并于TED2011演講中透露這個秘密。

Ralph Langner的英語網(wǎng)上資料

網(wǎng)站：Langner

[TED科技?娛樂?設(shè)計(jì)]

已有中譯字幕的TED影片目錄（繁體）（簡體）。請注意繁簡目錄是不一樣的。

Ralph Langner談21世紀(jì)電子武器Stuxnet揭密

Stuxnet計(jì)算機(jī)蠕蟲背后的想法其實(shí)很簡單，我們不希望伊朗造出原子彈，他們發(fā)展核武器的主要資產(chǎn)是納坦茲的濃縮鈾工廠，你們看到的灰色方塊是實(shí)時控制系統(tǒng)，現(xiàn)在，如果我們設(shè)法破壞控制速度和閥門的驅(qū)動系統(tǒng)，我們事實(shí)上可以使離心機(jī)產(chǎn)生很多問題。這些灰色方塊無法執(zhí)行Windows軟件，兩者是完全不同的技術(shù)，但如果我們設(shè)法將一個有效的Windows病毒放進(jìn)一臺筆記本電腦里，由一位機(jī)械工程師操作，設(shè)定這個灰色方塊，那么我們就可以著手進(jìn)行了，這就是Stuxnet大致背景。

因此，我們從Windows釋放程序開始，讓病毒載體進(jìn)入灰色方塊中，破壞離心機(jī)，延遲伊朗的核計(jì)劃，任務(wù)完成，很簡單，對吧？我想說明我們是如何發(fā)現(xiàn)這個的，當(dāng)我們在半年前開始研究Stuxnet時，對這個東西的攻擊目標(biāo)一無所知，唯一了解的是它在Windows的部份非常、非常復(fù)雜，釋放程序部份使用多個零日漏洞，它似乎想要做些什么，用這些灰色方塊，這些實(shí)時控制系統(tǒng)，因此，這引起我們的注意，我們開始了一個實(shí)驗(yàn)計(jì)劃，我們用Stuxnet感染我們的系統(tǒng)并審視結(jié)果，然后一些非常有趣的事發(fā)生了。Stuxnet表現(xiàn)得像只白老鼠，不喜歡我們的奶酪，聞一聞，但不想吃。這根本沒道里。之后，我們用不同口味的奶酪進(jìn)行實(shí)驗(yàn)，我意識到，哦，這是一個直接攻擊，完全直接的。釋放程序在這些灰

色方塊中有效的潛伏著，如果它發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個特定程序組態(tài)，甚至是它正試圖感染的程序，它都會確實(shí)針對這個目標(biāo)執(zhí)行，如果沒發(fā)現(xiàn)，Stuxnet就不起作用。

所以這真的引起了我的注意，我們開始進(jìn)行這方面的工作，幾乎日以繼夜，因?yàn)槲蚁耄冒桑覀儾恢浪哪繕?biāo)是什么，很可能的，比方說美國的發(fā)電廠，或德國的化工廠，所以我們最好盡快找出目標(biāo)。因此，我們抽出攻擊代碼并進(jìn)行反編譯，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)它的結(jié)構(gòu)由兩個數(shù)字炸彈組成，一個較小、一個較大。我們也看到，這是非常專業(yè)的設(shè)計(jì)，由顯然知道所有內(nèi)幕信息的人編寫，他們知道所有必需攻擊的位和字節(jié)，搞不好他們還知道控制員的鞋子尺寸，因此他們什么都知道。

如果你曾聽過Stuxnet的釋放程序，是復(fù)雜、高科技的，讓我跟你們說明一下。病毒本身是很高科技沒錯，比我們曾見過的任何編碼都高深，這是這個實(shí)際攻擊代碼的樣本，我們談?wù)摰氖谴蟾?5,000行的代碼，看起來很像舊式的匯編語言。我想告訴你們的是，我們?nèi)绾文軌蚶斫膺@段代碼，所以，我們首先要尋找的是系統(tǒng)的函數(shù)調(diào)用，因?yàn)槲覀冎浪鼈兊淖饔檬鞘裁础?/p>

然后，我們尋找時間控制器和數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)，試圖將其與真實(shí)世界連結(jié)起來，尋找現(xiàn)實(shí)世界中的潛在目標(biāo)，因此我們必需進(jìn)行目標(biāo)推測，以便確認(rèn)或排除。為了找到推測目標(biāo)，我們想到，它必定具有絕對破壞性，必定是一個高價(jià)值目標(biāo)，最可能設(shè)置在伊朗，因?yàn)檫@是大部份感染發(fā)生的地點(diǎn)。在這區(qū)域內(nèi)你不會找到幾千個目標(biāo)，基本上范圍可以縮小為布什爾核電廠及納坦茲濃縮鈾工廠。

所以我告訴我的助手，“列出我們客戶中所有離心機(jī)和核電廠專家的名單”，我打電話給他們，聽取他們的意見，努力用我們在代碼和數(shù)據(jù)中的發(fā)現(xiàn)與他們的專業(yè)知識做對照。這很有效，因此，我們找出了這個小數(shù)字彈頭與轉(zhuǎn)子控制的關(guān)聯(lián)，轉(zhuǎn)子是離心機(jī)內(nèi)部的運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)零件，就是你們看到的這個黑色物體，如果控制這個轉(zhuǎn)子的速度，事實(shí)上你就能使轉(zhuǎn)子損壞，甚至最后使離心機(jī)爆炸。我們也看到了這次攻擊的目標(biāo)，實(shí)際上進(jìn)行的相當(dāng)緩慢、低調(diào)，顯然為了達(dá)成目標(biāo)，快把維修工程師逼瘋了，因?yàn)樗麄儫o法迅速找出答案。

這個大數(shù)字彈頭－我們做過嘗試，非常仔細(xì)檢查數(shù)據(jù)和數(shù)據(jù)結(jié)構(gòu)，因此，例如數(shù)字164在這些代碼中確實(shí)很突出，你不能忽視它。我開始研究科學(xué)文獻(xiàn)，這些離心機(jī)如何在納坦茲組建，并找出它們的結(jié)構(gòu)，就是所謂的層級。每個層級由164臺離心機(jī)組成，這就說的通了，與我們的結(jié)果匹配。

而它甚至更有幫助。這些在伊朗的離心機(jī)細(xì)分為15種所謂的等級，你猜我們在攻擊代碼中發(fā)現(xiàn)什么？一個幾乎相同的結(jié)構(gòu)。所以，同樣的，這與結(jié)果完美匹配，就我們所尋找的東西來說，這給了我們相當(dāng)大的信心。別誤解我的意思，不是像這樣彈指之間，為了獲致這些成果，歷經(jīng)幾星期相當(dāng)艱苦的奮斗，我們常常走進(jìn)死胡同，必需重新來過。

總之，我們找到了這兩個數(shù)字彈頭，實(shí)際上是針對同一個目標(biāo)，但從不同角度。小彈頭對準(zhǔn)一個層級，讓轉(zhuǎn)子加速旋轉(zhuǎn)然后急遽減速，而大彈頭影響六個層級并操縱閥門，總之，我們非常有信心，我們已經(jīng)確認(rèn)目標(biāo)是什么，是納坦茲，就只有納坦茲。因此，我們不必?fù)?dān)心其它目標(biāo)可能被Stuxnet攻擊。

我們看到一些非常酷的東西，真的讓我印象深刻。下方是灰色方塊，頂端你們看到的是離心機(jī)，這些東西所做的是攔截來自傳感器的輸入值，例如，來自壓力傳感器和振動傳感器的，它提供正常代碼，在攻擊中依然執(zhí)行，用的是假的輸入數(shù)

據(jù)。事實(shí)上，這個假的輸入數(shù)據(jù)是Stuxnet事先錄制的，因此，這就像來自好萊塢電影的搶劫過程中，監(jiān)視器被放入預(yù)錄的影片，酷吧？

這里的想法顯然不僅是愚弄控制室中的操作者，實(shí)際上更加危險(xiǎn)且更具攻擊性，這個想法是規(guī)避數(shù)字安全系統(tǒng)。我們需要數(shù)字安全系統(tǒng)，當(dāng)一位人類操作員的行動不夠快時，因此，例如在一座核電廠中，當(dāng)一臺大蒸汽渦輪機(jī)嚴(yán)重超速時，你必須在一毫秒內(nèi)打開泄壓閥。顯然，一位人類操作員辦不到，因此，這就是我們需要使用數(shù)字安全系統(tǒng)之處。當(dāng)它們被破壞，真正糟糕的事就會發(fā)生了，你的工廠會爆炸，無論你的操作員或安全系統(tǒng)都無法注意到這一點(diǎn)，這很可怕。

但還會更糟。我要說的這些相當(dāng)重要，想想看，這種攻擊是一般性的，它沒什么特定性，對離心機(jī)來說，還有濃縮鈾，因此，它也會作用于，例如一座核電廠或一座汽車工廠，它是通用的，你不需要－身為攻擊者，你不需要藉由USB裝置傳遞這個病毒載體，如我們在Stuxnet例子中看到的，你也可以使用傳統(tǒng)的蠕蟲病毒技術(shù)的來散播，盡可能傳播四方。如果你這么做，最終它會變成具大規(guī)模破壞性的網(wǎng)絡(luò)武器，這是我們必然會面臨的后果。所以，不幸的是，這種攻擊最大量的目標(biāo)并不是在中東，而是在美國、歐洲和日本。因此，所有這些綠色區(qū)域就是遭受最多攻擊的目標(biāo)，我們必須面對這個后果，我們最好現(xiàn)在開始做準(zhǔn)備。

謝謝。

（掌聲）

Chris Anderson：我有個問題，Ralph，這件事已廣為人知，人們認(rèn)為摩薩德（以色列情報(bào)機(jī)構(gòu)）是幕后的主要推手，你也這么認(rèn)為嗎？

Ralph Langner：好，你真的想知道嗎？

Chris Anderson：是啊!

Ralph Langner：好，我的看法是，摩薩德有參與，但以色列并非領(lǐng)導(dǎo)勢力。因此，背后的主導(dǎo)力量是網(wǎng)絡(luò)超級大國，只有一個，就是美國。幸好、幸好，因?yàn)槿绻皇沁@樣，我們的問題可能更大。

CA：謝謝你嚇壞了美國人，謝謝Ralph。