機(jī)器為您服務(wù) You are being served

Until a couple of weeks ago, China Daily had a coffee stand in our lobby. I’m not much of a coffee drinker, but I did sometimes enjoy taking a coffee break in the middle of the afternoon. Often, some colleagues would be waiting in line and we’d have a chance to catch up. The stand was staffed by a personable young lady, Xie Xinshuang, who impressed me because she was always studying when no customer was present.

幾周之前，中國日報大廳內(nèi)還有一個賣咖啡的吧臺。我雖然不經(jīng)常喝咖啡，但偶爾在下午來一杯咖啡休息一會兒，還是很愜意的。買咖啡的時候通常需要排隊等候，所以同事們就會有機(jī)會閑聊幾句。這家咖啡店是由一個名叫謝信雙（音）的年輕姑娘開的，她總在沒有客人的時候?qū)W習(xí)，所以給我留下了深刻的印象。

Now, the coffee stand has been replaced by a machine. I guess we could call it a coffee robot.

而現(xiàn)在，這家咖啡店被機(jī)器取代了。我想我們可以稱之為咖啡機(jī)器人。

By some measures, this is an improvement from a consumer’s point of view. I can get my coffee a little bit faster, it costs a little bit less, and it actually tastes a little bit better. Of course, there is nobody to talk with.

從某種角度來說，這對顧客而言是一種進(jìn)步的做法。我可以更快地買到咖啡，成本也更低，口感也的確比之前更好。不過，也沒有排隊閑聊的人了。

This is an example of a trend that is likely to dominate the world in the coming decades. Fortunately, China Daily was able to find another job for Miss Xie, but many jobs will be lost to the coming revolution in artificial intelligence driven by big data and machine learning combined with 5G telecoms and robotics.

未來幾十年，世界很可能成為由機(jī)器主導(dǎo)的趨勢，咖啡機(jī)器人就是其中一個例子。幸運的是，謝女士還可以在中國日報找到其他的工作，而在結(jié)合了5G通信和機(jī)器人的大數(shù)據(jù)以及機(jī)器學(xué)習(xí)的人工智能革命到來之時，許多工作崗位將不復(fù)存在了。

In a widely reported recent study, researchers at the Oxford Martin School in the UK predicted that 47 percent of jobs in the US are in danger of being eliminated by automation. McKinsey Global Institute estimates that 30 percent of jobs worldwide will be eliminated by 2030.

最近的一項研究被廣泛報道，研究人員來自英國牛津大學(xué)馬丁學(xué)院，他預(yù)測美國由47%的工作崗位正面臨被自動化取代的危機(jī)中。麥肯錫全球研究所估測到2030年前，全球有30%的工作崗位將被淘汰。

Of course, we’ve heard predictions like this before. Kurt Vonnegut’s portentous 1952 novelPlayer Piano described the unproductive lives of workers displaced by automated factories. Vonnegut was especially incisive in that he predicted three factors we are seeing today— (1) People are unhappy without jobs, even if their physical needs are provided for; (2) Economies become more monopolistic as automation increases; and (3) People with high measured IQs and who went to the right schools have good opportunities, but everybody else is shut out.

當(dāng)然，我們早已經(jīng)聽到過類似的言論。庫爾特·馮內(nèi)古特（Kurt Vonnegut）曾在其1952年的小說《自動鋼琴》中描述了由于自動化，工人被取代工作，過著沒有生產(chǎn)活動的生活。庫爾特·馮內(nèi)古特尤為直指人心，他預(yù)測到了我們今天可以看到了三種因素——（1）人們即便有工作的需求，但并不愿意工作；（2）隨著自動化程度的提高，經(jīng)濟(jì)變得更加壟斷；（3）只有高智商的人，受過良好教育的人才會有好的機(jī)會，其他人則會被淘汰。

Twenty years ago, during the first wave of the internet, I was very enthusiastic about the changes I thought would happen in society. I thought that the internet would allow entrepreneurs all over the country, all over the world, to compete, so we would see a much more dynamic and competitive economy. In the realm of ideas and policies, I was looking forward to hearing from many voices, instead of the few large television networks and newspapers that had long dominated the US.

二十年前，互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的浪潮第一次席卷而來時，我非常期待社會因互聯(lián)網(wǎng)將有怎樣的改變。我認(rèn)為互聯(lián)網(wǎng)將全國，甚至全球的企業(yè)彼此競爭，因此我們將會看到更具動態(tài)更有競爭力的經(jīng)濟(jì)。在思想和政策領(lǐng)域，我期待著聽到許多聲音，而不是僅僅限于長期以來主導(dǎo)美國的少數(shù)大型電視網(wǎng)絡(luò)和報紙。

But I’ve been proven wrong on both counts. The US economy is now dominated by a few monopolies. Google and Facebook make their large returns on invested capital because they have a combined nearly monopolistic position over online advertising. The owners share some of their profits with their workers in the same way that the big three auto makers—General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler—did in the 1960s when they had an oligopoly in the then-closed US car market.

但是事實證明，這兩點都錯了。美國經(jīng)濟(jì)現(xiàn)在正被一些壟斷公司統(tǒng)治。谷歌和臉書從其投資中獲得了巨大回報，原因就是他們將在線廣告與壟斷地位聯(lián)合起來。所有者與其員工分享收益的方式與三大汽車制造商巨頭——通用，福特，克萊斯勒汽車在20世紀(jì)60年在封閉的美國汽車市場處于壟斷地位一樣。

Now, the number of entrepreneurial new startups in the US is at an all time low. Even in technology fields, the small number of large firms—Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft—either buy up promising new startups or put them out of business. Plus, these firms actively suppress the flow of new ideas.

現(xiàn)在，美國新興企業(yè)的數(shù)量處于有史以來最低點。即便在技術(shù)領(lǐng)域，少部分大公司比如谷歌，臉書，亞馬遜，蘋果，以及微軟公司要么買進(jìn)有潛力的初創(chuàng)公司，要么就使其倒閉。除此之外，這些公司還會阻礙新思想的傳播。

What I fear most is the “California-zation” of the world economy. To outsiders, California looks like a dynamic, innovative economy. But it is now an economy of fabulous wealth for a few, a declining middle class, and large numbers living in poverty. Data from the Census Bureau for 2010 to 2017 show that the state had the second highest rate of domestic out-migration in the nation—mostly middle-class people fleeing high taxes and very high housing costs. Only New York State had a larger portion of people deciding to leave.

最令我擔(dān)憂的是世界經(jīng)濟(jì)的“加州化”。在外人看來，加州看起來是一個充滿活力的創(chuàng)新經(jīng)濟(jì)。而現(xiàn)在它是一個包含一部分正在減少的極其富有的中產(chǎn)階級以及大量貧困人口的經(jīng)濟(jì)體。來自人口調(diào)查局自2010年起到2017年的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，該州的國內(nèi)外遷率位于第二，大多數(shù)的中產(chǎn)階級人口為了逃離高額的稅收以及高昂的房租。僅僅紐約州就有越來越多的人口決定離開。

In 2018, ,only 26 percent of California households earning the statewide median income could afford to buy a median-priced house, compared with 53 percent nationwide. And, with 12 percent of the US population, California has more than 25 percent of the nation’s homeless population.

2018年，加利福尼亞州只有26%可以達(dá)到全國中等收入水平的房主才可以買得起中等價位的房子，而這一比例在全國范圍內(nèi)為53%。占美國人口12%的加州，貧困人口卻占到了全國的25%。

According to a recent research brief by the Center for Demographics and Policy at Chapman University, two-thirds of the state’s job growth has been in minimum wage or near-minimum wage jobs. The high wages for tech workers in the San Francisco bay area have not offset the loss of 423,000 manufacturing jobs in the rest of the state over the last 15 years.

根據(jù)最近一項來自查普曼大學(xué)（Chapman University）人口與政策中心的研究調(diào)查表明，加州三分之二的就業(yè)增長來自低收入崗位或接近低收入崗位。舊金山灣區(qū)高薪技術(shù)工人的工資，并不能抵消加州十五年來42.3萬的制造業(yè)崗位丟失的損失。

And, California has the second worst GINI coefficient—a measure of inequality—in the nation, behind only New York. Its inequality level is now worse than that of Mexico. 48.5 percent of the state’s children live in or near poverty.

并且，加州的基尼系數(shù)位居第二（基尼系數(shù)指的是貧富差距的測量手段），這一結(jié)果僅次于紐約。加州目前的貧富差距水平甚至都超越了墨西哥。48.5%的兒童處于或瀕臨貧困的邊緣。

As recently as the 1980s, California was the golden state, with the best education levels and the lowest poverty in the nation. Adjusted for cost levels, it now has the highest rate of poverty in the US. And, due to low math and reading scores and high drop-out rates, its schools rank the ninth worst in the nation.

就在20世紀(jì)80年代，加州曾是一個黃金州，擁有最好的教育水平以及全國最少的貧困人口。根據(jù)調(diào)整后的生活成本計算，加州成為全美貧困率最高的州。并且，由于較低的數(shù)學(xué)與閱讀分?jǐn)?shù)，以及高輟學(xué)率，其學(xué)校在全國排名第九。

Every nation in the world needs to find a way to avoid this situation. The coming technology has the potential to benefit mankind, but all its benefits must not be allowed to go to a few monopolistic companies and a small number of people.

世界上的每個國家都需要尋找方法以避免這一情況的發(fā)生。即將到來的技術(shù)時代將造福于全人類，但是，絕不能讓少數(shù)壟斷公司和少數(shù)人占有所有的利益。