第1段
A 板块|预言自己失去权力的权力大亨
查看译文
A 板块|预言自己失去权力的权力大亨
今天先带着问题读原文,再进入段落精读工作台,最后用自测、翻译和仿写确认自己真正掌握了什么。
扫码付款后,请添加小助理微信:foxwulihua4。
发送付款截图,小助理会发你学习专属码。
输入专属码后,可查看当前班期已解锁内容。
学习专属码
首次使用请输入小助理发你的专属码;换手机或电脑时输入同一个专属码,就能同步学习记录。
今晚不要只数“两个悖论和一个矛盾”。请看它们是不是都在说同一件事——马斯克嘴上说的和手上做的,到底哪里对不上?自己先列一遍,再去正文核对。读B板块时圈出as if the game is up和left in the dust,想想这两个说法背后,藏着一种什么样的心态。
A 板块|预言自己失去权力的权力大亨
In our long interview with him this week, featured in The Insider and our Business section, the engineer and entrepreneur sets out two paradoxes and one contradiction. The first paradox is that one of the world's most power-hungry tycoons is enthusiastically helping create a technology that he says will render him—and all other human beings—powerless after as little as five years. The second is that the world's richest man says he is preparing for a world of infinite abundance, where money, including his $750bn fortune, no longer matters. And the contradiction is that, despite these stated beliefs, Mr Musk continues to act as if they were not true.
In his first paradox, the powerful Mr Musk expects to become powerless because he believes that nobody can stop the thinking capacity of AI from exceeding that of humanity within five years and dwarfing it within ten. Just as AIs will dominate the digital realm, so legions of AI-powered robots will dominate the physical world, he predicts. Against such relentless competition, he simply cannot imagine people holding their own. If so, AIs will not take orders from people any more than they would from chimpanzees.
B 板块|技术冲在前面,社会准备被甩在后面
His largely institution-free regulatory proposal is flimsy and self-serving. Although the urgency is welcome, he wants a technology that he expects to determine the future of humanity to lie in the hands of a few people like him, each with their own values. Nobody can be sure how fast or how far AI will reshape society, but behaving as if the game is up is both a counsel of despair and a misdirection that seeks to convince others who might wish to get involved of the futility of trying.
Instead, Mr Musk's words suggest a more troubling conclusion. While the race to create the most advanced AI is charging ahead, the thinking about how to prepare society is being left in the dust. The fatalism that Mr Musk draws from AI's repeated ability to beat expectations risks being infectious. A cynical reading is that this would serve his purpose, because he would be freer to pursue the technology without the oversight it deserves. That must not be.
请先自己翻译下面这句话。不要急着追求漂亮,先把主干、修饰关系和语境逻辑译清楚。
下一步:等 8:00 解锁后,再看讲义、完成训练和打卡。现在不用提前做这里。
请先完成 21:00 预习包:英文原文、预习题和长难句挑战。
精读讲义将在第二天早上 08:00 自动解锁。解锁后可查看原文标亮版、词汇注释、长难句解析和老师带读。
每段原文下面直接展开译文、词汇和长难句。
马斯克的未来叙事里,藏着一组自相矛盾的画面——A板块把它们摆到一起:强人预言强人将无力,首富预言财富将无意义,实际行动却仍按旧世界的权力逻辑展开。B板块把矛头转向治理。马斯克的方案把决定人类未来的技术交给少数价值观各异的人;他的宿命论还可能让其他人提前放弃参与。结尾那组速度对照最关键:AI竞赛一路猛冲,社会准备却被远远甩开。
A 板块|预言自己失去权力的权力大亨
A 板块|预言自己失去权力的权力大亨
In our long interview with him this week, featured in The Insider and our Business section, the engineer and entrepreneur sets out two paradoxes and one contradiction. The first paradox is that one of the world's most power-hungry tycoons is enthusiastically helping create a technology that he says will render him—and all other human beings—powerless after as little as five years. The second is that the world's richest man says he is preparing for a world of infinite abundance, where money, including his $750bn fortune, no longer matters. And the contradiction is that, despite these stated beliefs, Mr Musk continues to act as if they were not true.
本周,我们对他进行了一次长篇专访,内容刊载于《内幕》及本刊商业版块。这位工程师兼企业家在采访中提出了两个悖论和一个矛盾。第一个悖论是:这位全球最热衷于追逐权力的大亨之一,却在积极推动一项他自己认为将在短短五年内令他乃至全人类都丧失主导权的技术。第二个悖论是:这位全球首富声称自己正在为一个物质极度丰裕的世界做准备,在那个世界里,金钱将失去意义,包括他那高达7500亿美元的巨额财富。而矛盾之处在于,尽管持有上述信念,马斯克的实际行动却与之背道而驰,仿佛这一切从未是他真正相信的事。
power-hungry渴求权力的。
✨ 拓展/考点:与powerful不同,前者写欲望,后者写现实地位。这里故意让power-hungry与powerless相撞。
infinite abundance无限丰裕。
✨ 拓展/考点:经济学讨论通常从稀缺出发,这个短语描绘资源近乎无限的反常世界。
原句再现 The first paradox is that one of the world's most power-hungry tycoons is enthusiastically helping create a technology that he says will render him—and all other human beings—powerless after as little as five years.
结构拆解 主干是The first paradox is that...。表语从句中,主语为one of...tycoons;a technology后接定语从句,he says插在其中,真正谓语是will render。破折号把受影响者从马斯克扩展到全人类。
翻译点拨 中文先落“第一个悖论是”,再把长主语压成“这位……大亨之一”。after as little as five years强调最快只需五年,不能漏掉时间之短。
推荐译法 第一个悖论是:这位全球最热衷于追逐权力的大亨之一,却在积极推动一项他自己认为将在短短五年内令他乃至全人类都丧失主导权的技术。
In his first paradox, the powerful Mr Musk expects to become powerless because he believes that nobody can stop the thinking capacity of AI from exceeding that of humanity within five years and dwarfing it within ten. Just as AIs will dominate the digital realm, so legions of AI-powered robots will dominate the physical world, he predicts. Against such relentless competition, he simply cannot imagine people holding their own. If so, AIs will not take orders from people any more than they would from chimpanzees.
在他提出的第一个悖论中,身为权贵的马斯克却预见自己终将走向无力。他坚信,没有任何力量能够阻止人工智能的思维能力在五年内超越人类,并在十年内将人类远远抛在身后。他预测,人工智能将称霸数字世界,而大批人工智能机器人也将统治现实世界。面对这种势不可挡的竞争,他认为人类根本无力与之抗衡。若果真如此,人工智能将不再服从人类的指令,正如它们不会服从黑猩猩一样。
B 板块|技术冲在前面,社会准备被甩在后面
B 板块|技术冲在前面,社会准备被甩在后面
His largely institution-free regulatory proposal is flimsy and self-serving. Although the urgency is welcome, he wants a technology that he expects to determine the future of humanity to lie in the hands of a few people like him, each with their own values. Nobody can be sure how fast or how far AI will reshape society, but behaving as if the game is up is both a counsel of despair and a misdirection that seeks to convince others who might wish to get involved of the futility of trying.
他那几乎不受任何机构制约的监管方案既缺乏说服力,又带有明显的私利色彩。尽管他所表现出的紧迫感值得肯定,但他却希望这项可能决定人类命运的技术,掌握在少数几个像他一样、各有其价值取向的人手中。没有人能预知人工智能将以怎样的速度和深度重塑社会,但若表现得仿佛一切已成定局,不仅是一种令人沮丧的悲观论调,更是一种刻意的误导,意在让那些本有意参与其中的人相信,任何努力都将是徒劳的。
institution-free几乎不受机构约束的。
✨ 拓展/考点:-free不仅表示“无糖、免税”,也可写制度缺位;此处带批评意味。
the game is up大势已去;一切已成定局。
✨ 拓展/考点:通常用于秘密败露或败局确定。作者批评的是在治理开始前就宣布无力回天。
counsel of despair令人放弃努力的悲观主张。
✨ 拓展/考点:counsel在这里指意见或主张,不是“律师”。
原句再现 Nobody can be sure how fast or how far AI will reshape society, but behaving as if the game is up is both a counsel of despair and a misdirection that seeks to convince others who might wish to get involved of the futility of trying.
结构拆解 前半how fast or how far...作be sure的宾语。but后由behaving...作主语,主干为is both A and B。that修饰misdirection,who再修饰others。
翻译点拨 后半不要跟着英文层层堆定语。先说“仿佛一切已定局”,再分别落“悲观论调”和“刻意误导”,最后拆出误导的目的。
推荐译法 没有人能预知人工智能将以怎样的速度和深度重塑社会,但若表现得仿佛一切已成定局,不仅是一种令人沮丧的悲观论调,更是一种刻意的误导,意在让那些本有意参与其中的人相信,任何努力都将是徒劳的。
Instead, Mr Musk's words suggest a more troubling conclusion. While the race to create the most advanced AI is charging ahead, the thinking about how to prepare society is being left in the dust. The fatalism that Mr Musk draws from AI's repeated ability to beat expectations risks being infectious. A cynical reading is that this would serve his purpose, because he would be freer to pursue the technology without the oversight it deserves. That must not be.
然而,马斯克的言论却指向了一个更令人忧虑的结论。在研发最先进人工智能的竞赛高歌猛进之际,关于如何让社会为此做好准备的思考却已远远落后。马斯克从人工智能屡屡突破预期这一现象中得出的宿命论,极有可能像病毒一样蔓延开来。从愤世嫉俗的角度看,这恰恰符合他的利益,因为一旦人们接受了这种宿命论,他便可以更加肆无忌惮地推进相关技术,而无需承受本应有的监管约束。对此,我们绝不能坐视不管。
render...powerless使……失去力量。
✨ 拓展/考点:render + 宾语 + 形容词/名词常见于正式文体,如render a rule ineffective。
dwarf使相形见绌;远远超过。
✨ 拓展/考点:作动词时常写规模差,如The new cost dwarfs the original estimate.
hold one's own站稳脚跟;不落下风。
✨ 拓展/考点:强调面对更强对手仍能维持表现,不能照字面译成“守住自己的东西”。
self-serving为自身利益服务的。
✨ 拓展/考点:常修饰argument/proposal/account,暗示表面理由背后有私利。
leave...in the dust把……远远甩在后面。
✨ 拓展/考点:速度隐喻,适合写技术、制度、技能更新之间的差距。
第1段用两个悖论和一个矛盾,审视马斯克的可信度——权力大亨推动一项让自己失权的技术,世界首富预言财富将变得毫无意义,可现实中的行动却仍然在争夺权力和资源。
矛盾摆出来了,第2段展开他给出的时间表和宿命判断:五年超过人类,十年远远甩开,再加上机器人进入物理世界,最终推出的结论是——人类将像黑猩猩一样,没法再对局面发号施令。
判断说完,第3段转向治理层面:马斯克希望这项技术继续掌握在少数价值观各异的人手中;as if the game is up这种说法,会让社会在规则还没建立起来之前,就先承认失败,也会让其他本想参与的人觉得介入已经没用了。
第4段指出一个更现实的速度差——AI竞赛charging ahead(一路猛冲),社会准备却left in the dust(被甩在身后)。宿命论一旦扩散,开发者就可能在更少监督下继续往前走,这正是作者最担心的制度后果。四段的矛头,最终离开了人物性格,落到了公共选择上。没人能准确知道AI会多快重塑社会,但这种不确定性,恰恰要求更多的治理准备,不该成为少数人垄断决定权的理由。
While X is charging ahead, thinking about Y is being left in the dust.(当X一路猛冲时,对Y的思考却被远远甩在后面。)
这个句式适合写“技术推进快、制度准备慢”的错位。X放进高速变化,Y放进被忽略的配套问题。
训练区会在 8:00 精读讲义解锁后开放。请先完成预习,第二天看完讲义后再进入试译、参考译文和自测练习。
这里不是重复做题,而是把刚学过的词义、结构和译法真正用出来。
先自测,再翻译、仿写,最后保存今日打卡。
自测原文
In our long interview with him this week, featured in The Insider and our Business section, the engineer and entrepreneur sets out two paradoxes and one contradiction. The first paradox is that one of the world's most power-hungry tycoons is enthusiastically helping create a technology that he says will render him—and all other human beings—powerless after as little as five years. The second is that the world's richest man says he is preparing for a world of infinite abundance, where money, including his $750bn fortune, no longer matters. And the contradiction is that, despite these stated beliefs, Mr Musk continues to act as if they were not true.
In his first paradox, the powerful Mr Musk expects to become powerless because he believes that nobody can stop the thinking capacity of AI from exceeding that of humanity within five years and dwarfing it within ten. Just as AIs will dominate the digital realm, so legions of AI-powered robots will dominate the physical world, he predicts. Against such relentless competition, he simply cannot imagine people holding their own. If so, AIs will not take orders from people any more than they would from chimpanzees.
His largely institution-free regulatory proposal is flimsy and self-serving. Although the urgency is welcome, he wants a technology that he expects to determine the future of humanity to lie in the hands of a few people like him, each with their own values. Nobody can be sure how fast or how far AI will reshape society, but behaving as if the game is up is both a counsel of despair and a misdirection that seeks to convince others who might wish to get involved of the futility of trying.
Instead, Mr Musk's words suggest a more troubling conclusion. While the race to create the most advanced AI is charging ahead, the thinking about how to prepare society is being left in the dust. The fatalism that Mr Musk draws from AI's repeated ability to beat expectations risks being infectious. A cynical reading is that this would serve his purpose, because he would be freer to pursue the technology without the oversight it deserves. That must not be.
hold their own在文中表示人类能够:institution-free和in the hands of a few people共同限定了批评对象。请翻译: Although the urgency is welcome, he wants a technology that he expects to determine the future of humanity to lie in the hands of a few people like him, each with their own values.
✍️ 下笔提示 先抓主干he wants a technology to lie...。 两个that层次不同,each...补充说明“少数人”。
模仿While X is charging ahead, thinking about Y is being left in the dust.,写一句某项技术快速发展、配套规则却明显滞后的句子。
✍️ 下笔提示 保留两条速度线:X负责“猛冲”,Y负责“掉队”。 适合写AI、自动驾驶、生物技术或平台治理。
下一步:晚上回来这里看共性问题、典型误区和老师补充。现在可以先提交今天最卡的问题。
翻译门诊会根据当天学员提交到答疑池的问题,筛选高频疑问、典型误区和老师补充提醒。
你可以先完成学习任务,并提交问题到答疑池。
20:30 翻译门诊不是重复上午讲义,而是根据学员提交的问题,补充讲解高频疑问、典型误区和老师提醒。
今晚重点看三处。
第一,legions of只表示“大批”,不能译成“数以百万计”。原文没有提供数字,翻译不能替作者加上一个具体量级。
第二,power-hungry与powerless是A板块最关键的一组词。一个渴求权力的人,主动推进可能令自己无力的技术,悖论就在这两个词之间成立。
第三,作者批评的重点不是“马斯克对AI太悲观”,而是这种悲观可能产生现实效果:让其他参与者相信努力无用,监管和社会准备因此更慢。读评论文章时,要继续追问一种说法会改变谁的行动。
新版框架:30天打卡|20天正课|4周完成。老师端重点放在:内容状态、发布物料、答疑取舍、校对清单和学员问题整理。
今晚 Day14 预习包已更新。先不要看译文,完成三件事:读原文、做预习题、试译长难句。明早讲义会先给标亮版、词汇注释和长难句解析,最后再放参考译文。
Day14 午间提醒:今天重点看三个地方:关键词怎么用、句子逻辑怎么转、长难句怎么拆。先自己判断,再回到讲义里对照。