@AllKindsOfWong I'm worried about growing ease of surveillance (by both government *and* the public) and loss of privacy.
Lots of ongoing incremental improvements in many production processes making many products better and cheaper every year are very good.

@AllKindsOfWong我担心越来越容易被监视（政府和公众）和失去隐私。
在许多生产过程中持续不断的改进，使许多产品每年都变得更好、更便宜，这是非常好的。

@AllKindsOfWong I'd agree development of weapons tech is usually harmful.
The internet has been on balance very good imo. Medical tech has for the last century been very good.
AI is definitely easier to criticize and more of a mixed bag.

@我同意武器技术的发展通常是有害的。
国际海事组织认为，互联网在总体上是非常好的。医疗技术在上个世纪是非常好的。
人工智能绝对更容易被批评，而且更容易被混为一谈。

@AllKindsOfWong I'd agree strongly with that wrt power over people, and disagree wrt power over nature.

@我强烈同意对人的权力，也不同意对自然的权力。

@AllKindsOfWong I'm very serious about this. The last decade of Western movies has close to nothing that presents an optimistic framing of technology and its potential to uplift people, and instead portrays tech as always creating dystopias. This is so deeply harmful to us...

@我对这事很认真。过去十年的西方电影几乎什么都没有，呈现出一种乐观的技术框架和它提升人们的潜力，相反，它把技术描绘成总是制造反乌托邦。这对我们非常有害。。。

@AllKindsOfWong Yeah, movies teach horrible morals nowadays unfortunately 😥

@是啊，不幸的是，现在电影教人可怕的道德观😥

@random_walker @tarunchitra What if the rhetoric of the former is needed to motivate people to accomplish the latter?
I always try to avoid extreme statements I can't defend, but I do think too much meekness can be harmful too...

@如果需要前者的花言巧语来激励人们去完成后者呢？
我总是尽量避免我无法辩护的极端言论，但我确实认为太多的温顺也可能有害。。。

@AllKindsOfWong Yeah, "end death" is pretty much the goal. Ending death from viruses is already widely understood to be a noble goal to shoot for, I want ending death from aging to be viewed similarly, and for us to make great progress against both.

@是啊，“结束死亡”几乎就是目标。结束病毒性死亡已经被广泛理解为一个崇高的目标，我希望结束衰老性死亡也能被同样看待，并为我们在对抗两者方面取得巨大进展。

@tylercowen Non-economists in general are almost always too prone to binary thinking. Econ emphasis on curves and first and second order derivatives is great at fixing this.
(yes, I know returns are sometimes increasing; I still think on balance errors are much reduced)

@一般来说，非经济学家泰勒·欧文（tylercowen）几乎总是太倾向于二元思维。Econ对曲线和一阶和二阶导数的强调很好地解决了这个问题。
（是的，我知道回报率有时会增加；我仍然认为总的来说，误差会减少很多）

@Intelibron @Jhowland33 China and India will start dropping quite soon.
It's Africa that will be pretty much the sole driver of population growth in a few decades. https://t.co/EX3fyL9pxq

@Intelibron@Jhowland33中国和印度将很快开始下降。
在未来几十年里，非洲几乎是人口增长的唯一驱动力。https://t.co/EX3fyL9pxq

@augustogesualdi @Jhowland33 Most of the economic resources we use do in fact come from humans.
Earth's carrying capacity in hunter gatherer era: 0.7 humans per km^2
Earth's carrying capacity today: 70+ humans per km^2
Where did that added 69.3 come from? Human technology.

@我们使用的大部分经济资源实际上都来自人类。
狩猎采集时代的地球承载力：每平方公里0.7人
今天地球的承载能力：每平方公里有70多人
增加的69.3是从哪里来的？人类技术。

@FrankGoertzen So first I think the boon of everyone being able to enjoy way more than 80 years of life vastly outweighs any cultural downsides.
But second, I think even the second-order cultural consequences of very long life could be very positive! A lot more wisdom, long term orientation...

@因此，首先我认为，每个人都能享受80多年的生活，其好处远远超过任何文化上的负面影响。
但第二，我认为即使是长寿的二阶文化后果也可能是非常积极的！更多的智慧，长期定位。。。

Thesis: centralized organization and trust
Antithesis: mountain-man "do everything for yourself" mentality
Synthesis: use blockchains, cryptography, smart contracts and other tech to build new and better, and trust/authority-minimizing, ways for people to cooperate and interact https://twitter.com/VitalikBut...

论文题目：集中组织与信任
对立面：山人“一切为了自己”的心态
综合：使用区块链、密码、智能合约和其他技术来建立新的更好的、信任/权威最小化的人们合作和互动的方式https://twitter.com/VitalikBut。。。

Thesis: centralized spam protection
Antithesis: unmoderated communications with anonymity/privacy, but lots of spam
Synthesis: spam protection with privacy
https://ethresear.ch/t/conditi...
https://ethresear.ch/t/semapho... https://twitter.com/VitalikBut...

论文题目：集中垃圾邮件防护
对立面：匿名/隐私的无干扰通信，但大量垃圾邮件
综合：带有隐私的垃圾邮件保护
https://ethresear.ch/t/conditi。。。
https://ethresear.ch/t/semapho。。。https://twitter.com/VitalikBut。。。

Thesis: traditional BFT consensus (cheap, only digital signatures, and has finality, but requires trusted parties)
Antithesis: Nakamoto PoW (open, anyone can participate, but expensive and no finality)
Synthesis: proof of stake (anyone can participate, has finality *and* cheap) https://twitter.com/VitalikBut...

论文题目：传统的BFT共识（便宜，只有数字签名，具有最终性，但需要可信方）
对立面：中本战俘（开放，任何人都可以参加，但费用昂贵，没有定论）
综合：利害关系证明（任何人都可以参与，有最终性*和*便宜）https://twitter.com/VitalikBut。。。

Thesis: trust the integrity of the ledger to third parties
Antithesis: you must personally verify every tx in the entire ledger
Synthesis: intelligent techniques that approach the security of the latter and the efficiency of the former
#sharding #data_availability_checks #snarks https://twitter.com/VitalikBut...

论文：将账本的完整性托付给第三方
对立面：你必须亲自核实整个账本上的每个发送
综合：接近后者安全性和前者效率的智能技术
#分片数据可用性检查snarks https://twitter.com/VitalikBut。。。

Thesis: trust a centralized third party to hold your assets
Antithesis: pure self-custody
Synthesis: use smart contracts, multisig, social recovery and other techniques to build systems more robust than either.
One multisig recovery standard in progress: https://github.com/ethereum/EI...

论文：委托一个集中的第三方持有你的资产
对立面：纯粹的自我监护
综合：使用智能合约、多智能体、社会恢复和其他技术来构建比任何一种都更健壮的系统。
一个正在进行的多sig恢复标准：https://github.com/ethereum/EI。。。

@socioanna @interfluidity He could use a treadmill. All the good ones support an incline of up to ~6-10 degrees, so less strenuous than a hill but still a reasonably similar type of workload.

@他可以用跑步机。所有的好的都能支撑高达6-10度的斜坡，因此比小山更不费力，但仍然是一种相当类似的工作量。

@MarkoCorn Actually most modern theories suggest that there's no species-level benefit to aging, rather aging is an inherently difficult-to-get-rid of challenge in any evolved complex system, the problem is that there just isn't enough evolutionary pressure to get rid of it.

@事实上，大多数现代理论认为，在物种层面上，衰老是没有益处的，相反，在任何进化的复杂系统中，衰老是一个固有的难以摆脱的挑战，问题是没有足够的进化压力来摆脱它。

@arpitrage @ATabarrok As long as we make papers waaaay more understandable than they are today!

@只要我们能使文件比今天更容易理解！

@vancecook9 My estimate of the time delay between billionaires getting anti-aging and it being available to >50% of the population is at most 10-20 years.
Most modern tech is that way; the hard part is figuring out what to do, scaling it up from there is relatively easy.

@据我估计，亿万富翁抗衰老与50%的人口抗衰老之间的时间延迟最多为10-20年。
大多数现代科技都是这样的；最困难的部分是弄清楚该做什么，从那里扩大规模相对容易。