与扎克·戴维斯探讨创新的含义

成绩单

本集由Untold Content 's赞助播出雷竞技电竞竞猜创新故事训练雷竞技raybet提现。在这种沉浸式和互动的故事驱动的经验中增加购买。您的团队在哪个讲故事技术的最新项目，原型和投票 - 并通过25个史诗般的创新故事的史诗例子来启发。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:00:04)欢迎来到《不为人知的创新故事》，在这里，我们将通过不为人知的内容放大不为人知的见解、影响和创新故事。雷竞技电竞竞猜我是主持人，凯蒂·特劳斯·泰勒。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:00:19]我们今天的嘉宾是扎克·戴维斯，他是劳伦斯利弗莫尔国家实验室的高级研究员，也是加州蒙特利海军研究生院的研究教授。扎克，我很高兴你能来播客上讨论一些我们到目前为止还没有涉及到的东西。我想说，这是创新的阴暗面，如果你喜欢这样形容的话。但我认为，在美国，甚至在全球，有一种丰富而流行的说法，那就是创新、进步和技术进步总是好的。硅谷的文化在某种程度上加剧或放大了这一点。我们说“快速行动，打破常规”。但你的领导能力，实际上是，非常重要的，在相反的思路，那就是:当某些风险和创新成果没有按照计划的方向发展或者当它们实际上是为了有害而被发明出来的时候会对我们的国家安全，我们的公司或我们的生计造成什么威胁，什么风险?跟我们说说你的工作吧。我发现这是非常迷人的，我真的很兴奋投入其中。

Zach Davis：(00:01:38)嗯,谢谢你,凯蒂。是的，技术总是一把双刃剑，它总是具有双重用途的性质。事实上，正如你在国防工业和美国政府中提到的，我们特别在寻找可以应用于你可能称之为黑暗面的创新。这是我们的目标。这有很长的历史。事实上，它的技术似乎总是更能反映人类的本性，而不是其他任何东西。这让我想起了2001年电影的第一个开场:《太空漫游》，猿猴们站在巨石前。大约一分钟后，他们拿起那块骨头，开始敲打骨头，四处张望，看看能打到谁。所以这是人的天性。技术只是人类本性的一种表达。 And with all of its, you know, with all of its flaws and itself having a dark side and a light side. Right?

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:03:14)是的。导致您对这一领导行的研究进入的是什么？

Zach Davis：(00:03:21)是的，我开始我是说，当我终于有机会上大学的时候，这对我来说并不是很自然，但当我上大学的时候，我想要进入科学领域。我对科学和物理非常感兴趣。作为一名冲浪者，我想学习海洋学，我认为这是结合我的兴趣的好方法。所以当我开始上学去上那些课的时候，没过多久我就意识到我对科技的影响，政治后果，决策，科技成果更感兴趣而不是科技本身。这让我开始尝试研究科学政策和技术政策以及与之相关的决策。当然，这很快就会导致核武器和相应的或战略性的技术，这些技术有能力改变世界，让世界朝着不同的方向稳步发展。所以我很感兴趣核武器和核战略和核核历史和政策,这些技术开始,如何以及他们如何演变成我的意思是,核武器和核技术是一个很好的例子,我说什么双重使用。对吧?它可以是一种奇妙的能量来源并被应用于医学，对人类和人类都有真正的好处，但它也有一种内在的能力摧毁一切已经建立和创造的东西。这是一种典型的战略潜伏型技术。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:05:35)是的。所以你写了很多关于战略延迟的事情。对于人们，对于听众而言，可能不像熟悉这个词：你能帮助为守工唱歌定义它吗？

Zach Davis：(00:05:45)是的。因此，通过许多名称和不同，您知道，不同的机构，不同的研究人员对新兴技术，新兴和破坏性技术有不同的话语。我们在战略延迟中击中了几个原因。一个是我们使用这个非常过度使用的词，战略，对吗？那么战略是什么？这对我们来说意味着什么是特别长的，而不仅仅是每种技术，而且我们想要区分那些世界变化的技术如何改变力量的东西，这会改变的东西如果是[否定的措辞]定义和世界配电定义，请忽略。因此，当然，那种Winnows下的名单，仍然有一个关于哪种技术属于该类别的辩论。并且有一个数字现在是这种能力的候选人。但是，当然，核武器是一种关于技术中固有的战略能力的海报孩子。 The second word, latency, which is another amorphous term and means different things to different people, but latent, for us, refers to that underlying and sometimes yet unexploited, unappreciated aspect of the technology, because quite often these technologies don’t have the obvious application that now, it all, in retrospect, seems clear to us that these things had this latent potential to be used in these ways. But, oftentimes, these technologies lay sort of dormant until they meet up with other technologies, or that’s where we get into the realm of innovation, right? Someone comes up with an idea like, “well, you know, we could…” And then there’s a chain of events that brings that latency to the fore and then it can be exploited either for commercial or military or creative purposes. And so there is a lot of latency around in the technologies that there are lists and lists of technologies that could be exploited in different ways. And today we have the whole biotech field is really genetic engineering going off with latent potential. And there’s quantum computing, hypersonics, space is another area where there’s a tremendous explosion of latent technologies that have the potential – they could be on the list. But yet we don’t know. And maybe 20 years ago, people were talking about, you know, cyber and the Internet. And this has tremendous potential to change the world. And it wasn’t clear how that was going to unfold with iPhones and the like. And it has. And so these things are hard to predict and they are latent until, you know, the human motivation puts that intent behind it and starts to innovate and create new applications.

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:09:47]因此，根据定义，战略延迟，有一些时间的时间涉及，而且对此进行研究。所以很多创新团队都专注于“未来，”或试图预测未来的趋势，特别是在消费者行为中，这是一种事情。在您的脑海中，在创新内部发生战略潜在研究与未来工作的关系是什么？

Zach Davis：(00:10:13)那么，这是一个非常有趣的话题领域，因为人们爱上了预测，对吧？然后，他们想要它，他们想要了解未来......

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:10:27)他们想成为正确的那个人。

Zach Davis：[00:10:29]他们做他们想做的现金就可以了或者他们想要写科幻小说。对吧?他们希望......他们希望看到的未来。并有一个伟大的 - 凡尔纳和威尔斯H.G.和艾萨克·阿西莫夫 - 他们都有对未来的技术，伟大的想法。今天我们有样的人试图预测山寨产业的发展。但是，我认为更具体的国防应用的世界里，你知道，有战略预警的问题，对不对？什么是未来？什么......如果他们能做到这一点？他们能这样做吗？所以有一个专注于其他创新者，其他国家，其他公司，其他团体，其他竞争对手在做什么和“有什么关系？” What if they were able to put this with that and, you know, so predicting also is – sorry to say – hard and there’s a sort of a unicorn that we’re chasing in prediction that maybe with enough data. Right? Maybe with big enough computers and enough data and the right algorithms, you know, we could come up with a prediction as to how these technologies are going to join up with human motivations and produce something we haven’t seen before. And is that going to be dangerous and is that going to be applied to military purposes? And so, you know, prediction in the US government really is the realm of the intelligence community where you’re looking at what’s coming and do we need to warn people about it? But it’s also in the realm of defense planning, right? Because you’re building today or you’re planning today for things that won’t come into existence for, sometimes, years and years, takes a long time to build a big naval or space system. And so you want to know what the battlefield looks like now. So that you can prepare for it, but of course, you can’t. So there’s a… It’s a robust industry these days, this notion of foresight and predicting what’s coming and how it’s going to manifest. And, of course, in the private sector, that is business intelligence. Right? That’s what it’s going to be doing.

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:13:32]是的。嗯，在商业世界和创新者的动机和政府在国家安全中的作用之间存在额外的讽刺和紧张。在我们对创新的考虑方面，这里真的有一个冲突。创新者正在使用数据和预测来预测可能有利可图，了解可能导致某些新技术的不断变化的行为，而不必考虑到国家安全的后果。另一方面，您有国家安全与国防和国防部和国家领导和政府有用，因为他们的主要优先事项是安全，同时也仍然有助于经济增长。所以这些事情处于如此紧张状态，在我看来他们真的说出不同的语言。

Zach Davis：(00:14:32)好吧，你是对的。它曾经是我的意思是至少在冷战期间，许多大型技术创新起源于政府。他们是大型政府计划的结果，你知道曼哈顿项目。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:14:53]是的。

Zach Davis：(00:14:55)隐身或iPhone。因此，这些政府机构和政府项目是许多这些世界变化技术的发源地，这意味着，一时，政府可以控制这些事情，对吗？你可以有出口管制，你可以保密，你可以说，你知道，不是每个人都被允许知道这个，你可以控制它。对吧?这是一种控制技术更广泛影响的方法。但当然，一切都是瞬间，政府真的不再是，你知道，这些类型的大型技术创新的唯一来源。它真的在私营部门。这就是硅谷进入图片的地方。而且，当然，你知道，这是一种不同的文化，但他们与政府的基本不同的目标不同。正如你所说，你知道，政府的主要目的是保护人民和国家。 And the companies are primarily focused on making money and shareholder value. And so there’s a really big gap. Right. And it is a gap between the cultures. And you said, I mean, the language that people use is, you know, it’s hard to even talk across that gulf of government-speak and defense-speak and intel-speak and Silicon Valley entrepreneurial culture that has grown up with its own language and its own way of doing things. But interestingly, you know, the government, like I was saying, you know, wanting the best newest technology, wanting to understand the battlefield of the future and prepare for it is… At least understands that they need the private sector now. And interestingly, the private sector is global. These Silicon Valley firms are global. They are not US firms in many ways. They’re fully globalized and they have a global customer base and their talent base is global. They get people and experts from the world. And so you’ve got a situation where these formerly secretive defense industrial complex managers are forced to reach out to the primary source of innovation and try to bridge that gap, and so there have been a number of efforts put in place specifically to do that. So there’s something in Silicon Valley here called the “Defense Innovation Unit.” It was created in the last administration specifically to build a bridge and get to know and, as they put it when it was established, be a kind of a, you know, a consulate, be a kind of an embassy for the Defense Department in Silicon Valley and reach out and understand, you know, their needs.

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:18:41]这个术语，这个比喻本身就说明了分裂的严重性，它是一个领事馆，就好像我们进入了外国领土，必须说一种完全不同的语言。

Zach Davis：[00:18:54]这是真的。所以你看见一对情侣在真正的紧张时刻的......特别是，你知道，人工智能，与A.I。和国防部意识到他们生活中不可缺少的是，未来的战场将是很严重依赖这些工具有多种用途的，并且没有追索权。他们不得不去硅谷。美国中央情报局已经有了一个前哨基地，并在美国硅谷的前哨称为在-Q-Tel公司。而他们的商业模式看，可以被应用到他们的需求，情报需求的技术，并确保这些公司并没有死。对吧?So they were in the role of kind of a venture capital investment entity that would make sure that these companies that were struggling, that had something that were really on to something that the government could use, didn’t just die in what they call the “Valley of Death” between a great idea and a first round of funding. But “we just couldn’t make it work. We just couldn’t find the customer base, so we had to close it up.” So that model has been successful. The Defense Innovation Unit model is a little bit different, but they also are looking at startups and they’re looking at ways to build these partnerships and bring the Silicon Valley class into the inner circle of what their defense needs really are. And with A.I., that all kind of focused on something called “Project Maven” in which Google was helping, because they are a leader in this field, and Google was helping the Defense Department and mainly in the massive flows of data. Right? I mean, that’s really the battlefield of the future, are these massive flows of data coming from multiple sources because it’s a multi-domain battlefield, is what we call it now, where, you know, you’ve got the space assets and ground, and unmanned vehicles of various types, massive data flows coming in. And so Project Maven was helping with that, and you saw kind of a rebellion among some of the Google staff. “[unclear wording] kill people, I’m not doing that,” and so it was maybe an instructive experience for both sides and more people in the valley side are coming to understand the totality of what defense means and the defense side, people are coming more to understand the priorities and ethics of the private sector.

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:22:36)我希望你能继续分享更多关于这方面的内容。你们写了领先专家对新兴和颠覆性技术带来的威胁、机遇和国家安全挑战的关键见解。你已经提供了一些强有力的例子，但你能分享更多来自这个特定领域的故事吗?

Zach Davis：(00:23:02)好吧，是的，我的意思是，这是一个有趣的一部分对这个整个主题的一部分，对，是，你知道，它是如此广阔，对吧？它削减了每个斯托维夫，你知道，每个文化和每个国家。所以我猜这是思考的方式是，在人的身边，你知道，人们在做什么，对吧？您知道，不在我们所知道的地方，而是在其他国家的地方开发的一些创新技术是什么。And of course, there’s a lot of attention being paid, these days, to China because they are clearly making the investments, they are putting their money where their mouth is and they’re pouring resources, and by that I mean human resources, but monetary resources, they’re putting a lot of effort into these key technology areas and that includes the biotech field. But computing power, you know, neurology, it’s just across the board and they’re putting the pieces together and they’re getting their people trained in the best universities around the world. And they’ve clearly made it a goal to be a leader in a number of these key technologies. And that has people concerned because of the military complications. And one of the interesting aspects of this global competition is that these country cultures are also evident in the competition. So you look at Russia and it’s a whole different thing. And this question of the private sector becomes really important, whereas China has unleashed these companies, although, with a tether – and you saw this in the Tik Tok and WeChat concerns – is that some of their technologies may actually still have a link to the government. And so that raises the well, why? Why… What are they doing with this data? Is this going to be weaponized? In Russia, you just don’t have the private sector and that’s really hurt them. And it’s made it very hard for them to compete in certain areas. Now, of course, they have world-class brainpower, but they just don’t have the financial resources or the entrepreneurial class, and they lose those people to the West, where they go off to make money, right? And so, you know, Russia’s going to be… Going to be hurt by this. And so I guess one of the most interesting aspects of this is the cultural dimension that, as globalized as everything is and as globally available as all this technology is in the defense world, it still comes down to countries. And how different countries make decisions and have a good relationship with these companies and are able to rely on them and have a mutually beneficial relationship, or whether you have to go outside of your own country and pay the price for global technology. So it’s interesting. And, of course, the other way you can categorize it is biotechnologies, right? And a lot of these fields are culturally different, right? So the biotech industry is really different from the biological sciences operate by a different set of scientific norms and principles, and, you know, you go through a different training in order to be credible and productive in that field. So you get into a lot of other sort of disciplinary or multidisciplinary controversies as well. Right? The ethics, the norms and even treaties. Right?

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:27:55]我们在Theranos World的帖子和一些盲目的势头中，不够弗兰克，医学严谨或科学评论。我认为这种空间的文化开始改变，验证更为重要。但即使是去年，仍然存在一项伟大的研究研究，关于缺乏同行评审围绕医疗保健Unicorns的研究。

Zach Davis：(00:28:24)正确的。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:28:25)我会在节目中链接它，因为它是一个很好的阅读，但我认为文化开始改变。但这是一个缓慢的变化。而且再次，这真的很重要，而不仅仅是......对国家安全兴趣没有，就我们把我们送到世界的医疗产品的有效性方面。

Zach Davis：[00:28:44]这是其中一个有趣的方面，你知道，随之而来的道德问题，在某种程度上是嵌入在条约，实践和科学界运作的方式中。但特别是如果你看一下生物科学，你知道，有些人期望某些事情不应该做，我们不应该做某些事情。这些障碍中有很多已经被测试过了，也被绕过了，所以这在国防和外交领域是一个有趣的问题，很多关于不应该做的事情的行为规范都体现在条约中。有生物武器条约，化学武器条约，核不扩散条约，禁止在大气中试验核武器和试验的条约，以及人类决定最好不要做的事情，为了所有人的利益，我想问一下，这些规范、做法、制度、法律和协议是否正在经受考验，并被证明是不可执行的，当到了紧要关头，是否不再被实践，不再被尊重，这是很公平的。所以你会看到化学武器卷土重来。这是人们认为已经解决的问题。《禁止化学武器公约》有一个执行和核查机构。但当这些国际多边机构依赖于大国来实施这些想法时，你知道，这就归结为大国政治。现在，大国政治没有把多边协议放在…

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:31:36)也许感觉是短期的。

Zach Davis：[00:31:39]更为直接。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:31:39]正确的。正确的。我将在可能提前说，这可能实际上是短期个人收益或...有趣。

Zach Davis：(00:31:48)正确的。是的。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:31:50)你能说一点——我知道你的专业领域是大规模杀伤性武器和更多的人身威胁——但我们也生活在这样一个时代的假情报和数据被用来影响和改变公众舆论或人们的心态。你的研究中也涉及到这个领域吗?

Zach Davis：(00:32:18)好吧，我是一个流浪汉，我是一个万事通，但它让我去找合适的人来回答这类问题。在我们为特种作战司令部写的新书中有很大一部分是关于假情报的。当然，你知道，目前显而易见的例子是，它是多么容易和全球化的信息流已经民主化的破坏。这太简单了。你不需要有很多资源。这与发现新元素或部署新武器系统不同。这真的打开了这个领域，因为它太简单了。你们知道我是如何开始谈论这些工具仅仅是人类本性的反映。我想这就是你在虚假信息方面看到的。你知道，这些缺陷，这些缺陷，我的意思是，这是……对吧? Throughout political philosophy, it’s in the Bible, it’s in all of our understanding of human nature that we have these fears and insecurities and prejudices and confirmation bias. And that’s just a part of being human. And so these tools, these global tools that can get into your pocket, that can reach billions in a nanosecond, have opened up this new realm of influence operations. And again, you know, no norms to guide this, no sense of restraint. And we have hurtled forward in discovering the latent potential of these technologies and the influence on individual group, collective consciousness. And of course, that has tremendous implications for democracy, but also for leadership. When you can undermine decision-making by introducing controversial ideas that are not supportive of leadership directions or leadership, you know, priorities and and it’s just too easy and we seem to be, globally, willing to, you know, to let this tsunami overwhelm us. And what comes on the other side when there’s no ability to distinguish between truth and lies or interpretations, and it comes down to critical thought. I mean, I asked my kids about this, too, because they, you know, they’re on all these social media platforms. And I’m not and I don’t understand. And they say, “hey, you know, Dad, did you hear about this?” And I go, “well that sounds like… That is stupid. That can’t be right.” “Yeah. Well, you know as well, you know…” Fortunately or unfortunately, this new generation is at least extremely cynical. I find. And that maybe our saving grace, right? That they don’t believe… they know it’s all B.S. They don’t believe anybody. They don’t believe me. They don’t believe you. They don’t believe it. They, at least, I mean, it’s a little disheartening because you don’t want to raise a generation of cynics. On the other hand, they at least have this critical capacity to know that all this stuff that’s flowing into their phones and computers and across the you know, the universe may or may not be true. The problem is they don’t believe anybody, right?

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:36:42)对,对,对。我认为，在这么多年之后，我们生活在一个被社交媒体主宰的世界里，我们只是看到一些公司开始屏蔽虚假信息或采取更积极的措施。这是个问题。但至少我们现在正朝着这个方向前进，这花了很长时间。也许是由于国家安全和政府领导人的抵制，创新界开始更有准备地捍卫和保护不正确信息的快速传播。

Zach Davis：(00:37:33)嗯，我认为这是一场新的全球软实力竞争。所有这些，你知道，这种连接和使之成为可能的机制正在为影响和全球力量打开新的可能性。软实力在某种程度上次于硬实力，军事、经济、实际的力量形式，而软实力，你知道，是文化和概念上的，以及其他形式的影响力，这些影响力来自于全球的联系。我想你们特别注意到，中国实体现在已经收购了大部分好莱坞大型电影制片厂，并对内容施加影响。有一个词我很讨厌，但我不得不说那就是全球都在竞争叙事。对吧?谁在讲这个故事?我想这正是你的拿手好戏，凯蒂。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:39:00)正确的。

Zach Davis：(00:39:01)因为这是关于这个故事，谁讲述了这个故事以及你是如何讲故事的。和美国，在整个冷战中的优势时期，真的是那个主要的，这种位置能够讲述这个故事并控制叙述。因此，它是美国电影和美国作者和美国电视和美国产品。所以蝙蝠侠和列维的和约翰韦恩。我们建造了美国和美国世纪的叙述。我认为，在全球权力的比赛中，现在有一个......这都是争议。和几个崛起的权力，中国，也...中国和俄罗斯和伊朗以及许多正在崛起的国家的国家，有一个不同的故事来讲述。他们说，是的，我们听到了美国的故事，我们听到了殖民主义的故事。伟大，漂亮的故事。但是你已经完成了。 We’re done listening to you. And so global media is trying to tell different stories. And so, you know, India has its own story and they have their own sense of the world order and their own sense of history and what the future should look like. So rising powers are trying to change the narrative and they recognize that these… Global connectivity and the contest for soft power is really where the hearts and minds of the world are going to be changed. And whether the new order that is coming will favor, and unfortunately, this comes down to either national or cultural or ethnic… There was a big article that came out around the end of the Cold War by an international relations scholar. His name was Samuel Huntington, very influential. And he posited that now that the Cold War was over and that the restraints on these big national and ethnic rivalries had been eliminated that the future would now sort of devolve into, unfortunately, what… Kind of something more along the lines of what we’re seeing now. It’s that there would be, you know, a Chinese narrative, a European narrative, a South American narrative, a South Asian narrative. That the big divisions in the world would manifest in this sort of globalized competition for, you know, the hearts and minds of the world. And that’s kind of what’s happening. I mean, anyone can tell the story now.

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:42:22)正确的。正确的。就像你说的，对一个国家或实体来说，通过使用虚假信息来获得软实力太容易了。而且，你知道，所有这些话题都会让你在个人层面上感到有些无助如果你不是控制国家安全决策的人。但我想，作为创新者、首席技术官、首席信息官、经理和在创新领域自下而上工作的人，听到这个——我们每个人都有一些收获。我们喜欢，在Untold，我们喜欢研究公众智识主义的概念。我们怎样才能把这个概念从一个出现在新闻圈里的一流人物转变成一个我们可以应用到日常生活中的概念呢?你是如何促进一个知识共享、重视和寻求真理的世界的?你在其中扮演了什么角色，你是如何掌握主动权的?综上所述，我希望我们能在最后结合一下关于个人责任的话题，真的，因为很多力量都是个人无法控制的。 And yet within our own spheres of influence, we do have some control over whether or not we allow our innovation stories to discuss the dark side and to have that ethical touch point in our innovation processes whereby we could kill a project because of its implications to the betterment of society. So share with us some of your thoughts on that. I think, you know, how do we as innovators prepare to say the dark side and communicate it and voice that in a world that does not value that?

Zach Davis：[00:44:26]哇哦!是的，凯蒂，这是个大问题。所以，我认为道德推理，对的，所有这些道德方面确实可以归结到个人层面，你知道，道德是代代相传的。我真的认为，讲故事，就像你定义的那样，对吧?但是你知道所有这些概念以及对与错的区分以及应该做什么和不应该做什么都可以归结为个人的决定。你知道，就像我说的，国家，民族国家，比以前更少的控制。大型机构、大型全球实体、权力集中的国家现在影响力已经减弱。权力向外分散，这就是全球主义如何真正扎根的原因。所以，我的意思是，如果有好消息的话，那就是决策，权力和机构，不管你怎么称呼它，已经下放到个人，地方团体层面。这与民族国家不同，民族国家追求他们必须追求的东西。 But. Each of us has that, as that decision making authority, and I would go back to the, where we started, in the dual-use nature of technology. You know, people ask “why?” Right? So you can say that “what’s driving all this?” Right? Is it the “dark side?” The money.. Is it greed? What’s what’s driving all this? Why are we… Why is this happening? And I used to think that the answer had to do with, you know, necessity, right? That technology and innovation unfolded when people had something that they needed. They needed to get a task done. They wanted to do something. And so they needed to innovate to achieve their goal. And the more I studied it, the more I realized that, you know, a lot of this innovation comes just from, you know, “why?” Because I was messing around with this. Because I wanted it. Because I was curious. Because I was interested or, you know, I didn’t plan on this. You know, I didn’t intend for this to happen, you know, this was serendipitous, this, you know, all just kind of came together. And so, I think what that means is, at the individual level, much of this innovation and much of the big developments…. Even those that are commanded and resourced and driven by larger interests, right, big Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, governments. You know, terrorist groups. They have their needs, but it does flow to the individual. To be, you know, this is all human. This is where we get focused on the shiny objects and we love our technology. But at the end of the day, this is all just human and it just… It’s in the hands of individuals.

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:48:53]正确的。正确的。有一刻我永远不会忘记。当我上大学的时候,一个英语教授,我们在阅读大屠杀文学和我们放下书,她抬起头,她说,嗯,感觉如何知道纳粹科学家进行不道德的犹太人口回家实验结束时每天晚上,家人说,嗨,亲爱的,然后躺在床上放松下来，开始新的一天?正确的。就像你说的，需求驱动行动，而道德与我们眼前的需求相比就变成了一个灰色地带，这是一个非常非常黑暗的例子。但我想提醒你,恐惧是合理的,或者,可怜的动作或不负责任的行为,都是合理的,因为单独和检查自己和足够的勇气,尤其是如果你是一个创新的领导者,让我们确保我们的故事的影响覆盖不仅是光滑的,美好的可能性和利益相关者的利益，也包括公共卫生利益或公共利益和全球利益。

Zach Davis：(00:50:12)正确的。完全正确。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:50:14]这很难。违背必要性，无论是处于最高水平还是个人......拥有个人生活，这很难。您对创新者有什么其他建议，作为一定会不断研究这些主题的人？

Zach Davis：(00:50:32)好吧，这是一个棘手的术语。我发现当人们谈论创新时，他们的意思是不同的，你知道，如果你在商界，那意味着一件事。对吧?这是一种颠覆性的商业模式。对吧?所以我们需要创新。正确的。优步是创新的，不是因为他们发明了什么技术，而是因为他们的商业理念。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:51:02)是的。

Zach Davis：(00:51:03)他们认为这是一种更好的赚钱或省钱的方法，在科学领域，创新要么是新的知识，让我们发现新的东西，一个新的元素或一个新的过程，一种新的发现方法。所以当他们创新时，让我们尝试一些不同的东西。我们的实验。当然，这意味着你不知道会发生什么。然后在战场上，当你谈论创新时，很多时候你谈论的是战术和战略。所有这些都涉及到对手或你的社区，对吧?这一切都离不开周围的环境，你会影响到其他人。所以你被嵌入了。无论是在商业世界的竞争中，你都想把这些人赶出这个行业。这就是Uber的出租车业务，对吧? That was an institution that had long, long been a part of society. And, you know, it’s like, just wipe them out. And, you know, people were a little bit sad about that. On the battlefield, a lot of times, it means either new ways to prevail. But also, I think, you know, one thing that is perhaps paradoxical, but positive is the whole notion of deterrence, right? If you get really good at fighting war. Then it definitely influences the mindset of potential adversaries, let’s not have a war, I don’t think that would work out well for us. So sort of the paradox of nuclear weapons, right? The ability to destroy everything turns out to be the secret to the long peace, right? When global competitors make a rational decision that war no longer can serve the purpose for which it’s prosecuted. You can’t – you can’t win. We can’t come out of it better than we started. Let’s just not do it. Let’s find a way to avoid war. So, you know, I find this notion of innovation really elusive, very evasive and something that is natural, it’s a natural outcome of curiosity, of necessity, of creativity. It’s a part of human nature, right? It’s a part of what we do to survive. And so I’ve often been kind of perplexed by prescriptions, you know, “how to innovate.”

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:54:18]是的！

Zach Davis：[00:54:18]以及“如何创造一个创新的工作场所”，你知道，“如何促进创新”，你知道，如何从人们身上挖掘创新。来吧。来吧。你能做到的!让我们创新。跳出框框，让我们试试。我只是觉得这是一个很难捕捉和摆姿势的东西。在我看来，你知道，更像一个独角兽，一些自然发生的事情，总是会发生，但不总是……你知道，你也无法抑制它。你不希望恐怖分子有创新精神。我是说，战争中最好的创新案例之一就是简易爆炸装置，对吧?

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:55:05)mmhm。

Zach Davis：(00:55:05)这是一种非常低的技术，你知道，这是世界各地的一些恐怖分子遇到的一种方法来对付压倒性的常规军事力量，你知道，他们想要破坏和击败。所以，你知道，恐怖分子非常擅长创新。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:[00:55:33]必要性，再一次，必要性。善良。谢谢你！我知道我们可以继续前进，我们谈到了一个小时，我无法相信它。它只飞到我身边。我相信听众也有这种感觉。Zach，我很感激有你在播客上谈论所有这些问题。而且我同意你的意见，我们需要继续为我们的创新理解而争取差别。在哪里可以 - 听众在哪里找到你？

Zach Davis：(00:56:04)嗯，我们在劳伦斯利弗莫尔国家实验室举行了一个网站，有一点智库在那里我工作，这是全球安全研究的中心，CGSR。所以它是“cgsr.llnl.gov”。我们对各种议题有很多出版物，涵盖各种问题的人。我们现在正在致力于大型生物安全项目，也在致力于一大堆气候和环境和安全项目。我们有很多出版物和许多有趣的讲座，您可以点击并从中学习。所以我在那里可以到达。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:56:54)太棒了。非常感谢扎克·戴维斯，感谢你参与我们的播客节目并加入我们。下次再聊。

Zach Davis：[00:57:02]谢谢你！凯蒂，谢谢你让我闲逛。

凯蒂Trauth泰勒:(00:57:05)感谢收听本周的节目。一定要在社交媒体上关注我们，并在对话中加入你的声音。你可以在Untold Content找雷竞技电竞竞猜到我们。

你可以多听几集不为人知的创新故事播客。

*采访不是对个人或企业的认可。