九个月像几十年：DHH 谈 Agentic Engineering、Vibe Coding 与 Omarchy

这期 Lex Fridman Podcast #501 是一场观点访谈：主持人 Lex Fridman 请来 Ruby on Rails 作者、37signals CTO、Omarchy Linux 发行版创建者 David Heinemeier Hansson（DHH），围绕 AI agent 编程、vibe coding、开源、Linux 桌面，以及父亲身份、移民与死亡观，展开约 5 小时 21 分钟的长谈。

读这篇摘要，可以先判断三件事：DHH 说的「过去九个月等于几十年」到底指什么；他如何区分 vibe coding 与 agentic engineering；Omarchy Quattro 是否足以当作他主张的可核对样本。政治与移民段落是嘉宾观点，文中会单独标出。

David Heinemeier Hansson 1979 年出生于丹麦哥本哈根，常被称作 DHH。他是 37signals（Basecamp）合伙人兼 CTO，2004 年把 Ruby on Rails 开源发布，并与 Jason Fried 合著 Getting Real、Rework、Remote、It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work 等书。他也是耐力赛赛车手，曾参加勒芒 24 小时并在 2014 年拿下 GTE Am 组别冠军。近年他主导基于 Arch Linux 的开发者发行版 Omarchy。2

这期里他有资格谈编程与 AI，不只因为 Rails 的历史，更因为他把自己的主张压进了一个可下载、可安装的产品：Omarchy Quattro。

约 13 个月前，DHH 还对 AI 写码半信半疑。他给出一个明确日期：2025 年 11 月 24 日。3在那之前，AI 只是「更高效地做他本来就会做的事」——查资料、对想法，情绪上并没有改变他和计算机的关系。之后，agent 在几个月里走过他口中的几段：先是好奇，再是惊人，再是有人喊 AGI，再到能拆任务、开子 agent 并行。

他反复引用那句老话：There are decades where nothing happens and weeks where decades happen. 过去九个月，在他看来就是「几十年被压进几周」。

情感上，他说自己几乎没有 existential dread，只有兴奋与乐观；风险更多是智力上承认，而不是情绪上的恐惧。面对「你是不是 AI psychosis」的质疑，他改用另一个词：delirium（兴奋性谵妄）。写了四十年程序的人，若看见两个月内发生的事还不 delirium，在他看来才不正常；真正的 psychosis，是假装这一刻没有重力。

他给自己的检验标准很硬：别只看嘴，要看有没有把「布丁」端上桌。Omarchy Quattro 在访谈前不久发布，他说下载量已到数万量级，而这个版本几乎全部代码由 agent 写出——他自己写的是规格、方向与关键层审查，而不是一行行手敲 UI。

Lex 用公开资料概括：Omarchy 是一套高度意见化、基于 Arch、以 Hyprland（Wayland tiling compositor）为中心的桌面发行版，目标是打磨过的开发者工作站。DHH 自己的说法更直白：它是 macOS / Windows 之外的另一种现代 Linux，而且要走向 agent-first。

项目从勒芒赛期间的「Linux ricing」冲动长出来。上一轮尝试叫 Omakub（基于 Ubuntu）；Omarchy 是第二轮。早期版本只是部分用 agent 加速，大约三个月前他改成全油门：几乎一切由 agent 写，由他掌舵。他形容这带来的不是「同一套系统写得更快」，而是系统本身变成另一种东西——因为目标变成创造「完美电脑」，所有 AI 实验都朝这个终点对齐。

一个他反复举的例子：他在 Linux 上用不了原来的写作软件，换过 Typora 后发现自己其实只用其中约 5%。于是他让 agent 做一款只满足这 5% 的写作应用，并声称类似路径下他还能用 C++、Rust 等自己并不日常手写的语言，把应用送进 Quattro。重点不是「DHH 突然成了 C++ 专家」，而是：个人软件的长尾定制，第一次变得经济上可行。

他还强调安装与手感上的极致：追求大约 45 秒级安装、界面与默认选择的打磨，以及让用户用自然语言「唠叨」二十分钟，就把系统改成自己的形状。Omarchy 附带一组 skills，告诉你带来的任何 agent「如何改这台机器」——这让更多非核心贡献者也能提交真正可合并的改动。

Shopify CEO Tobi Lütke 也入伙这套叙事；DHH 承认对方更早看到趋势，自己一度看不见。

DHH 的主线因果链是：

开源方面，他相当乐观：维护者迎来「最好时代」——agent 能批量处理勾选完整的 PR，同时把从前写不出补丁的人的想法也带进 commons。他甚至修正了自己前一阶段的看法：不再假设「所有好主意必须先从人类脑子里长出来再吩咐 agent」；agent 已能参与发现与提案。Linus 对 AI 贡献内核的开放态度，被他当作行业信号。

术语在这期里被故意掰开：

Lex 追问：会不会有一天直接把 agentic engineering 叫做 programming？DHH 反对复用旧词——programming 应保留对语言原语的理解；CEO 用自然语言吩咐团队做出产品，不会被叫作 programmer。

更刺的一点：他认为在某些问题上，老派程序员做 agentic engineering 可能反而更差。因为软件首先是产品管理——做什么、给谁、优先级、长什么样；很多程序员并不擅长这些。知道 for loop 有时会变成过度指令，把 agent 限死在自己的旧路径里。他的新习惯是：先尽量含糊地让东西出现，再玩、再差分评估（给三个选项选一个），并更常承认「agent 知道得更清楚」。

这也连到 AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md 的微优化热潮。他提到 Claude Code 相关访谈里，Opus 5（以及 Fable）系统提示反而变短——模型更强之后，少指挥有时更好。

经济叙事被他重写：过去「写漂亮代码」的理由，很大程度是小团队要低成本、少引入 bug、改得动。当 agent 能快速堆出能跑的东西，手工打磨每一行的经济回报下降；稀缺转向品味、产品判断、以及他所说的 token / 算力约束下的取舍。

给程序员的建议很克制，几乎反预测：

他提到与 Omarchy 伙伴 Ryan Hughes 的对话：一开始只求发行版别在凌晨崩；野心是被能力膨胀推着长出来的，不是规划出来的。

细节会随时间过时，但这期给出的工作方式仍有信号：

语音输入与打字的取舍、安装器速度、对延迟的执念，贯穿后半场——他把它上升为一种审美：快不是功能列表上的一行，而是「这台电脑是否值得爱」的一部分。

中段以后，话题离开 IDE。DHH 谈父亲身份时几乎不加修辞：与所爱的人一起创造并抚养生命，是他认的「地球上最巅峰的体验」之一；他担心低生育率，并把它说成对未来的「DNA 投资」——这是价值判断，不是人口学论文。

他反对把人生收成 Bryan Johnson 式的 Don't Die 使命。接受寿命有限，反而让他喜欢 Omarchy 日历上的 memento mori 提醒。死亡恐惧可以理解，但用无限优化去逃跑，在他看来会丢掉生活本身。

AI 视频与电影工具（访谈中提到 Higgsfield 等）被他当成另一类「愿景放大器」：不会自动给你品位，但能降低把脑海图像做出来的成本。PewDiePie 与 Linux 桌面文化，则被用来讨论「普通人为什么愿意碰 Linux」——好玩、可炫、可共创，往往比企业采购理由更管用。

后段进入政治。DHH 主张：国家有权设定移民政策；他倾向择优 / 基于能力的移民。他引用丹麦财政部一类公开核算，比较不同来源移民的财政净贡献（访谈中举例法国、英国、美国背景净贡献较高，索马里背景负担较高等）。这些是嘉宾的论述与其引用，不是本频道的核查结论；若你要核对，应回到原始财政报告与统计口径。

他表示不后悔公开谈这些，尽管代价是互联网上的仇恨与误解。与编程段落相比，这里更需要读者自己划清「观点 / 数据 / 因果」三层。

访谈末尾回到尼采式的 eternal recurrence：若人生要再活一次，你是否仍愿选择同样的热爱与风险。DHH 把对计算机的爱、对建造的执着，以及对有限性的接受，收成同一条线——未来可怖也可喜，但否认当下正在发生的跃迁，帮不了任何人。

完整中英双语逐字稿见文末附录；英文以 官网稿 为准，按讲话人姓名分段，并约每 10 分钟标一次时间轴。

There are decades where nothing happens and weeks where decades happen. And we have seen decades of progress happen in the last nine months. If you’re not recognizing the gravity of the moment, that’s the delusion. That’s the psychosis. Who would not get delirious if suddenly a genie pops out of the bottle and says, “You can have whatever you want. Every feature you’ve ever dreamed of in an operating system, I can deliver them to you, most of them in five minutes, a few in 20, and if we really go hog wild, it’s gonna take me two hours.” I want the fastest car breaking the speed limits. I want the diver watch that can go down the Mariana Trench. I want the operating system that can install in less than 60 seconds. One of the things I always loved about race cars was when I would stumble out of the car absolutely smashed and barely able to hold my head up, and I’d lay down on the garage floor and just think, “Holy fuck, I’m alive.” The Overton window does not open itself. It opens one nudge at a time by people risking a little. A little reputation, a little pushback, a little criticism, or maybe sometimes a lot of reputation or a lot of criticism or a lot of pushback. Creating life with another human that you love is literally the peak experience of being on the planet.

有几十年什么都不发生，有几周发生几十年。在过去的九个月里，我们看到了数十年的进步。如果你没有意识到这一刻的严重性，那就是妄想。这就是精神病。如果突然有一个精灵从瓶子里蹦出来说： “你想吃什么就吃什么。您在操作系统中梦寐以求的每一项功能，我都可以提供给您， 他们在五分钟内，几个在 20 ，如果我们真的去野猪，这将需要我两个小时。“我希望最快的车突破速度限制。我想要一块可以穿过马里亚纳海沟的潜水表。我想要可以在 60 秒内安装的操作系统。 我一直喜欢赛车的一件事是，当我跌跌撞撞地从车里掉出来时，我几乎无法抬起头，我躺在车库地板上，只是想， “天哪，我还活着。“ Overton 窗口不会自动打开。它会让人们冒一点风险，一次轻轻一推。一点声誉，一点阻力，一点批评，或者有时候很多声誉，很多批评，或者很多 与你所爱的另一个人一起创造生命实际上是这个星球上的巅峰体验。

The following is a conversation with David Heinemeier Hansson, also known as DHH, creator of Ruby on Rails, CTO of 37signals, creator of the new Omarchy Linux operating system, best-selling author, race car driver, and one of the most outspoken and prolific programmers in the world. For the past 20-plus years, for him, programming meant meticulously handcrafting beautiful Ruby code. But recently, since late 2025, DHH has embraced the AI revolution and has openly transformed himself into, once again, one of the most outspoken and prolific agentic engineers, even though he hates that term. So let’s say practitioners of whatever programming is becoming where AI is doing most of the actual programming and the human steers the ship with high-level design, vision, and taste. Yes, it’s true. DHH is at times controversial, but he’s always fearless, brilliant, and fun to talk to. This was, once again, an intense, eye-opening, and a wild rollercoaster ride of a conversation. This is a Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description where you can also find links to contact me, ask questions, give feedback, and so on. And now, dear friends, here’s DHH. 13 months ago, we sat down right here to talk about programming, and then everything changed. At that time, you were a bit skeptical about the role of AI in the process of programming, and then we went through this rapid evolution of agentic engineering. So simple question to start: How has your view on AI’s role in programming changed? Are you excited? Are you terrified? Are you on an emotional rollercoaster ride?

以下是与 David Heinemeier Hansson 的对话，他也被称为 DHH ， Ruby on Rails 的创建者， 37signals 的首席技术官，新的 Omarchy Linux 操作系统的创建者，畅销书作家，赛车手，以及世界上最直言不讳和多产的程序员之一。在过去的 20 多年里，对他来说，编程意味着精心手工制作美丽的 Ruby 代码。但最近，自 2025 年底以来， DHH 已经接受了人工智能 革命，并再次公开将自己转变为最直言不讳和多产的代理工程师之一，尽管他讨厌这个术语。因此，让我们假设任何编程的从业者都在人工智能正在做大部分实际编程，而人类则以高水平的设计、视觉和品味来驾驶这艘船。是的，这是真的。 DHH 有时会引起争议，但他总是无所畏惧，才华横溢，交谈很有趣。这又是一次激烈的、令人大开眼界的、疯狂的过山车之旅。这是 Lex Fridman 的播客。为了支持它，请在描述中查看我们的赞助商，您还可以在其中找到联系我、提出问题、提供反馈等的链接。现在，亲爱的朋友们，这里是 DHH。 13 个月前，我们坐在这里谈论编程，然后一切都变了。当时，您对人工智能在编程过程中的作用有点怀疑，然后我们经历了代理工程的快速发展。那么简单的问题：你对人工智能在编程中的作用的看法是如何改变的？你兴奋吗？你害怕吗？您是否正在乘坐情绪化的过山车？

I am incredibly excited.

我非常兴奋。

You’ve been talking about fun a lot.

你一直在谈论乐趣。

There is none of the existential threat. That doesn’t exist for me as an emotional component. It is only there as an intellectual component, and the emotional component for me is 100% pure, unadulterated joy- … and optimism and amazement that we’ve made computers do this. And I find it so interesting that we talked just 13 months ago because it’s like we talked in different universes, different eras. I love this quote. I think it’s Lenin. There are decades where nothing happens and weeks where decades happen. And we have seen decades of progress happen in the last nine months. I mean, imagine you’re there when the Wright brothers take flight. Yesterday, the New York Times would write, “It’s gonna be 10,000 years before we fly,” and then the day after, we’re up in the skies, and just a few years after that, there were cross-Atlantic planes. The whole world has completely changed. What a blessing to be there in that moment. If you zoom out and look at all of human history, how many humans got to live within the same epoch that they were born in? They never saw that complete change of the world and of society. And to have been blessed with two of those feels just such a privilege. I got to see the internet- … from pre-internet to post-internet, and then now pre-AI, post-AI. What an amazing run. How fortunate.

不存在任何生存威胁。对我来说，这不是一个情感成分。它只是一个智力成分，对我来说，情感成分是 100%纯粹、纯粹的快乐……以及我们让计算机做到这一点的乐观和惊讶。我觉得这很有趣，我们在 13 个月前才谈过，因为这就像我们在不同的宇宙、不同的时代谈过。我喜欢这句话。我想是列宁，那里 几十年不发生任何事情，几周几十年不发生任何事情。在过去的九个月里，我们看到了数十年的进步。我的意思是，想象一下当莱特兄弟起飞时你在那里。 昨天，《纽约时报》写道： “离我们飞翔还有一万年” ，然后第二天，我们在天空中飞翔，仅仅几年之后，就出现了跨大西洋的飞机。整个世界已经完全改变了。在那一刻在那里是多么的祝福。如果你仔细观察整个人类历史，有多少人生活在他们出生的同一个时代？他们从未见过这种完全的变化 世界和社会。能有幸拥有其中的两个，感觉就是这样一种特权。我看到了互联网--从前互联网到后互联网，然后是前人工智能，后人工智能。多么令人惊叹的跑步，多么幸运。

Yeah, but the thing is, this feels like a thing that happened faster than anything else in human history.

是的，但问题是，这感觉就像一件发生得比人类历史上任何事情都快的事情。

Correct.

对

So I would say somewhere around December, maybe late November-

所以我会说在 12 月左右的某个地方，也许是 11 月下旬--

November 24.

11 月 24 日

This is…

这些元素让团队互动

That’s the exact moment.

那正是那个时刻。

You know, when they talk about when one nation invades another in a world war or something like this, it– this is how we talk about AI changing everything. Yeah, the… And it really just shifted for many great developers. It shifted to where AI is doing some basic autocomplete, maybe writing 5, 10, 15, 20% of code, to writing 80% of code.

你知道，当他们谈论一个国家在世界大战或类似的事情中入侵另一个国家时，这就是我们谈论人工智能改变一切的方式。是的，它……对许多优秀的开发人员来说，它确实发生了变化。它转移到人工智能正在进行一些基本自动完成的地方，可能编写 5、10、15、20 ％的代码，编写 80 ％的代码。

Or 100.

或 100。

Or 100, yeah, especially if it’s not a public-facing product.

或者 100 ，是的，特别是如果它不是面向公众的产品。

To me, that’s why even when I look back upon our conversation a year ago, I don’t actually have different opinions. I have the same opinions. A year ago, I did not like the mode of AI we were offered. It was the autocomplete mode, or it was the AI chatbot mode. Now, the chatbot I actually liked, as we talked about. Great tutor right from the get-go, great way of looking things up on the internet, not what was gonna replace me chiseling code. But- … then we get the agents.

对我来说，这就是为什么即使当我回顾一年前的谈话时，我实际上也没有不同的意见。我也有同样的看法。一年前，我不喜欢我们提供的人工智能模式。这是自动完成模式，或者是人工智能聊天机器人模式。现在，正如我们所说，我真正喜欢的聊天机器人。从一开始就很棒的导师，在互联网上查找内容的绝佳方式，而不是取代我凿代码的方式。 但是……那我们就去找特工。

Yeah.

是的

And the agents start out being curiosities for about five minutes, and then they get amazing, and then they get, “Oh my God, is this AGI?” And all of that happened since last year, even just in, within the last nine months. We have basically these few phases here. We have AI in the pre-agentic era. I was excited about that, but it was not fundamentally rewriting the rules of the game for me. It was not completely changing how I worked. I was still chiseling code, I just had a little helper, a little sidekick- … who could bounce ideas off, and I could look up this information online and so forth in a more efficient way. It was just a more efficient way to do what I was already doing, and it didn’t change the emotional connection I had to the computer. Then we get to November 24th, 2025. Opus 4.5, to me, was the dividing line, where suddenly… I didn’t even try it on the 24th. I think I tried it on the 26th. I gave it a couple of tasks, and I realize that the quality of the output is uncannily close to what I would’ve written. And I remember just leaning back and thinking, “What just happened?” “How did we go from this autocomplete mess that I was talking to you about in the summer to this just a few short months later? How did we get both the increase in intelligence and then also the increase in usability?” This agent harness question where I don’t know if Opus 4.5 was that much smarter than Opus 4, which is what we had in the summer, but its ability to instrument your computer, to use tools, to check its own work, to apply its intelligence in such a way that you could get real meaningful work out of it, was completely different. And I think this is then the big change that happens for almost anyone who paid attention and started playing with it over the Christmas break. This is what I heard- … from Shopify and other places with lots of employees who suddenly had a breather, suddenly had a couple of weeks to lean back and just look at what was going on, gave it a try, and had the same mind-blowing experience that these agents were of a different genre than what we had before. And then what we get to is, I’m already excited at this point. Like, by December, I’m already revisiting sort of all my priors- … and going like, “Wow, if it can do this, can it also do that?” “Oh, yeah, it can.” And again, Opus 4.5 now looks like a retarded model. And this is the magic of this progress, is you think you’ve reached something… I remember thinking at the moment, “If this is the last model we get, I’ll be set. I’ll be happy.”

经纪人开始是好奇心大约五分钟，然后他们变得惊人，然后他们得到， “哦，我的上帝，这是 AGI 吗？“所有这一切都发生在去年以来，即使只是在过去的九个月内。我们这里基本上有几个阶段。我们在前药剂时代拥有人工智能。我对此感到兴奋，但这并没有从根本上重写游戏规则。这并没有完全改变我的工作方式。我 还在凿代码，我只是有一个小帮手，一个小助手-- ...他们可以反弹想法，我可以在网上以更有效的方式查找这些信息。这只是一种更有效的方式来完成我已经在做的事情，并没有改变我与电脑的情感联系。然后我们来到 2025 年 11 月 24 日。对我来说，作品 4.5 是分界线，突然......我甚至没有在 24 日尝试过。我想我在 26 号试过了。我给了它几个任务，我意识到 输出的质量不可思议地接近我所写的。我记得我只是向后靠，想： “刚才发生了什么？” “我们是如何从我在夏天和你谈论的这个自动完成的混乱状态发展到短短几个月后的这个状态的？我们如何既提高了智能又提高了可用性？“这个代理利用的问题，我不知道作品 4.5 是否比作品 4 聪明得多，这是我们在夏天所拥有的，但它有能力装备你的电脑，使用工具，检查自己的工作，应用 以这种方式，你可以得到真正有意义的工作，是完全不同的。我认为这是几乎所有在圣诞节期间关注并开始玩它的人所发生的重大变化。这就是我听到的-- ……来自 Shopify 和其他有很多员工的地方，他们突然喘不过气来，突然有几个星期的时间向后靠，看看发生了什么，试一试，并有同样令人兴奋的经历，这些代理的类型与我们以前不同。然后我们得到的是，我已经在这一点上感到兴奋。比如，到 12 月份，我已经重新审视了我所有的先例……然后说， “哇，如果 它能做到这一点吗？它也能做到这一点吗？ “哦，是的，它可以。“再一次， Opus 4.5 现在看起来像一个智障模型。这就是这一进步的神奇之处，你认为你已经达到了某种程度……我记得当时在想， “如果这是我们得到的最后一个模型，我会准备好的。我会很开心的。”

Yeah. Yep.

是啊，是啊

I could live with Opus 4.5 for the next 20 years- … and you would hear no complaints from me because it was just so incredibly amazing to see an agent do all this work in the way that I wanted it done. Because it was not just about it being able to solve a task, it was also that I could look at its path there and go, “Yep. Yep. Maybe not there, but almost,” and it would give you two notes. You’ll get to where I wanted to go in the way I wanted to go there. You could produce code I wanted to merge. You could produce code that actually looked beautiful if it was written in Ruby. Rust, different question. But this ability for the agents to truly become an extension of how I wanted to work was very novel. But then we wait just until early spring, and suddenly we get sub-agents. We get harnesses that can subdivide the task, and something that would take Opus quite a while suddenly took a fifth of the time, a 10th of the time, because it could get chopped up and suddenly you got eight sub-agents working for you. But both of those two first phases of the agentic age, to me, still felt like I had to drive. I could tell it what I wanted, where to look for it, and steer it a little bit when it went off, and then we’ll get there, and I would go much faster. But I had to be in the driver’s seat. I had to tell it what I wanted, and I had to be the reviewer, the auditor of what was coming out. And then finally now, this summer, with Opus 5, Fable, and Sol, GPT Sol, and to a lesser extent, some of the open weight models, we’ve arrived at a new era where I’m not telling it where we’re going. I’m telling it the problem I have. I’m telling it the fuzzy, vague idea I have. It tells me where we’re going. It tells me which path to take, and I will still look at it because I’m a curious person and I like computers and I like the outcome of it, but I really kinda don’t have to. I’ve become optional in the part that produces the code that picks the route. Remember when early GPS systems came out? They were amazing compared to looking at a map, but you still wanted to pay attention. Is it gonna drive you in the harbor? I remember these newspaper articles. “Ah, GPS, they’re terrible because people don’t pay attention, they drive in the harbor.” When was the last time GPS drove anyone in the harbor? Like, that just doesn’t happen anymore. In fact, the cars now just drive themselves, right? And this is where we’ve arrived at now, that I can trust. For the domain I’m working in right now, I can trust it and feel completely confident that it’s gonna have my back. It’s not gonna do something stupid, and if it does something stupid, it’s gonna be able to recover.

在接下来的 20 年里，我可以和 Opus 4.5 一起生活……您不会听到我的抱怨，因为看到经纪人以我希望的方式完成所有这些工作真是令人难以置信的惊人。因为它不仅仅是能够解决一项任务，我还可以看到它在那里的路径，然后说： “是的。是的。也许不在那里，但差不多，”它会给你两个笔记。您将以我想要的方式到达我想去的地方 去那里。您可以生成我想合并的代码。如果用 Ruby 编写，你可以生成看起来很漂亮的代码。Rust ，不同的问题。但是代理商真正成为我想要的工作方式的延伸是非常新颖的。但是我们等到早春，突然间我们得到了子代理。 我们得到了可以细分任务的线束，而花费 Opus 相当长时间的东西突然花费了五分之一的时间，十分之一的时间，因为它可能会被切碎，突然你有八个子代理为你工作。但对我来说，代理时代的前两个阶段，我仍然觉得我必须开车。我可以告诉它我想要什么，在哪里寻找它，并在它爆炸时稍微引导它，然后我们会得到 在那里，我会走得更快。 但我必须坐在驾驶座上。我必须告诉它我想要什么，我必须成为审稿人，审核出来的东西。最后，今年夏天，随着 Opus 5 ， Fable 和 Sol ， GPT Sol ，以及在较小程度上的一些开放式重量模型，我们已经进入了一个新时代，我不会告诉它我们要去哪里。我正在告诉它我的问题。我说的是我有的模糊不清的想法。它告诉我我们要去哪里。它 告诉我该走哪条路，我仍然会看着它，因为我是一个好奇的人，我喜欢电脑，我喜欢它的结果，但我真的不必。在生成选择路由的代码的部分，我已经成为可选的。还记得早期的 GPS 系统是什么时候问世的吗？ 与看地图相比，它们令人惊叹，但您仍然需要注意。它会开车送你去港口吗？我记得这些报纸上的文章。“啊， GPS ，它们太糟糕了，因为人们不注意，他们在港口开车。“上一次 GPS 在港口开车载人是什么时候？就像，那已经不再发生了。事实上，汽车现在只是自动驾驶，对吧？这就是我们现在到达的地方，我可以 信任。对于我现在工作的领域，我可以信任它，并完全相信它会支持我。它不会做一些愚蠢的事情，如果它做了愚蠢的事情，它就会恢复过来。

Mm-hmm. We should mention that there’s all kinds of domains that-

嗯嗯。我们应该提到，有各种各样的域名-

Correct.

对

… programmers operate in. There’s… I actually don’t know, but I think the most common domain in development is, like, web dev CRUD. You have a database. You have a user-facing interface, and it does something back and forth, and it could be internal to just one person, to multiple people, to a small number of people, or to the world. And I think for that, it’s– I mean, you could really get to the 100% of code written by AI and really almost– if you’re a good programmer and you have a good intuition about what’s happening behind the scenes, you can legitimately not look at the code, at least that’s been my experience. I don’t know how much prior experience with programming you need to have to kinda know that things are working correctly behind the scenes, like intuitively by observing the ripple effects, the symptoms of the system. But I think for that domain it’s close to 100%, and then there’s domains like you’re also operating in, which is writing a Linux distribution. There, maybe there’s more because you’re obsessed with speed and all that kind of stuff. There, maybe you need to look at the code a little bit more. Then there’s maybe safety critical systems all the way down to operating a nuclear power plant or a self-driving car. Maybe you need to look at the code more carefully.

……程序员在其中工作。有……实际上我不知道，但我认为开发中最常见的领域是 Web 开发 CRUD。您有一个数据库。 您有一个面向用户的界面，它可以来回操作，它可以是一个人、多个人、少数人或世界的内部界面。我认为，如果你是一个优秀的程序员，并且对幕后发生的事情有很好的直觉，你至少可以合理地不去看代码， 这是我的经验。我不知道你需要多少编程经验才能知道事情在幕后正常工作，比如直观地观察系统的涟漪效应和症状。 但我认为对于该域名来说，它接近 100% ，然后还有像您这样的域名，也就是编写 Linux 发行版。在那里，也许还有更多，因为你痴迷于速度和所有这些东西。在那里，也许您需要再看一下代码。然后可能是安全关键系统，一直到运营核电站或自动驾驶汽车。也许您需要查看代码 更加小心。

Yes, but that said, AI is insanely capable at both finding-

是的，但话虽如此，人工智能疯狂地能够同时发现--

Yeah.

是的

… and fixing security vulnerabilities. This was the whole blowup about Fable. This model was so capable of finding holes that an attacker could exploit that it was simply not safe to release. So the irony here is that when you look at that field, it seems like we’ve reached levels of intelligence that virtually no human can match because many of these security holes are about stringing combo moves together. You find one little vulnerability here that by itself might not be the worst thing in the world, but then you combine it with four others, and suddenly you have RCE, remote command execution. Humans who are able to do that are very rare. They usually work inside state-sponsored organizations or other clandestine operations. They’re not just out and about finding things. So they’ve gotten so good at that. The Linux distribution is why I’ve gotten 100% AI pilled. Because I’ve been working on Omarchy for the last three months, this version that just dropped a few days ago called Quattro. And almost right from the beginning I’m working on that version, the agent acceleration neared 100%, and in the last two months it has been 100%. I have not written-

……并修复安全漏洞。这就是寓言的全部内容。该模型能够发现漏洞，攻击者可以利用这些漏洞进行攻击，而释放这些漏洞根本不安全。具有讽刺意味的是，当你看到这个领域时，我们似乎已经达到了几乎没有人能比拟的智力水平，因为许多这些安全漏洞都是关于将组合动作串联在一起的。您可以在这里找到一个小漏洞 这本身可能不是世界上最糟糕的事情，但是你把它和其他四个结合起来，突然你就有了 RCE ，远程命令执行。能够做到这一点的人非常罕见。他们通常在国家支持的组织或其他秘密行动中工作。他们不仅仅是出去寻找东西。 所以他们已经很擅长这个了。Linux 发行版是我获得 100% AI 的原因。因为过去三个月我一直在开发 Omarchy ，这个几天前刚刚发布的版本叫 Quattro。几乎从一开始我就在研究那个版本，代理加速率接近 100% ，在过去的两个月里，代理加速率一直是 100%。我没有写过--

Really?

不会吧？

… any of the code that’s shipped in Quattro by hand. I’ve reviewed the shape of all of it. I’ve reviewed the individual lines of anything that’s critical in the model layer of the system, and I’ve not looked at a bunch of the UI code. I have not looked at a bunch of the auxiliary code, and I’ve not written any of the new functionality entirely by hand. But then the web part, actually evolving Basecamp and Hey, our professional products that have lots of users and are relatively large code bases, have proven surprisingly tricky to fully accelerate with agents. We just released Basecamp 5 not too long ago. That was the first product at 37signals that was really agent accelerated. Because we were in this final sprint phase from around February. By then, agents were already good. And we had this early surge of, “It’s solved. We can just have the designers do the programming. They know what features they want. They know what shape they want it to take. Let them vibe.” And we let them vibe. And we ended up with a lot of PRs that individually perhaps could have been justified for a hot moment, but taken all together, destroyed the architecture of the system. And we actually had to clean up manually, mop it up by hand, by human hand, to get back to an architecture that felt cohesive and coherent. So we still have a bit of that– that was February, by the way. Things are quite different now.

... Quattro 手工提供的任何代码。我已经查看了所有内容的形状。我已经查看了系统中模型层中任何关键内容的单独行，我没有查看一堆 UI 代码。我没有看过一堆辅助代码，也没有完全手工编写任何新功能。然后是 Web 部件，实际上是演进的 Basecamp 和 Hey ，我们的专业产品 大量用户，并且是相对较大的代码库，事实证明，使用代理进行完全加速非常棘手。我们不久前刚刚发布了 Basecamp 5。这是 37signals 上第一款真正加速代理的产品。因为我们在 2 月左右进入了最后的冲刺阶段。到那时，特工们已经很好了。 我们有过这样的早期激增， “它已经解决了。我们可以让设计师进行编程。他们知道自己想要什么功能。他们知道自己希望它采取什么样的形状。让他们感受到氛围。”我们让他们感受到氛围。我们最终得到了很多公关，这些公关可能在一个热门时刻是合理的，但总的来说，它们破坏了系统的架构。我们实际上不得不手动清理，手动清理， 回到一个有凝聚力和连贯性的建筑。所以我们仍然有一些-顺便说一下，那是 2 月。现在情况完全不同了。

Well, hold on a second. What’s the lesson from that? Is one of the lessons from that that you have to be a programmer at this stage to be able to vibe code?

好吧，等一下。从中得到的教训是什么？从中得到的教训之一是，你必须在这个阶段成为一名程序员才能编写代码？

To be able to vibe code on existing substantial-

为了能够对现有的实质性代码进行振动-

I see.

我明白了。

… code bases, even if they’re crud, if you wanna retain the element of architecture that got that system to where it was. Now, that’s also a point where I’ve stressed many times that when people accuse vibe coders of being slob generators, I go right back at them and say, “Have you looked at the average programmer’s output?” That is some other slob too. If you’ve looked at behind the scenes of many great companies and what their code bases look like after there’s been 3,000 humans through them, they’re awful. Absolutely awful.

[译文暂缺] … code bases, even if they’re crud, if you wanna retain the element of architect [译文暂缺] like after there’s been 3,000 humans through them, they’re awful. Absolutely awf

Can you tell me the intuition you have? I seem to—just stepping back and observing the different apps that we all rely on, I don’t know, Adobe Photoshop, all this kind of stuff—there seems to be… the progress on development there has not accelerated. So why is it, what lessons can you draw from Basecamp, like well-established, huge user base? Why aren’t we seeing, like, super rapid increase in, like, new updates, features, all this kind of stuff in these well-established apps?

[译文暂缺] Can you tell me the intuition you have? I seem to—just stepping back and observi [译文暂缺] in these well-established apps?

Multiple reasons. I’ll start with the first one that’s the most critical. As soon as you’re having human teams work together on something, the bottleneck is rarely implementation. It’s human bandwidth and communication. When you have a product manager and a couple of designers and a VP above them and a CTO above them, and everyone wants to be part of the shaping process because we’re all justifying why we’re here, that’s where all the productivity goes to die. The revelation I’ve had working on Omarchy the last three months is that to get that magical 10X, 100X, in a few rare cases, 1000X productivity boost, you have to interact with the agents directly, and you cannot intermediate that bandwidth with another human because it’s simply too slow. And on the one hand, that’s a bit of a bummer. I mean, I like humans, and it’s great to work together. But it also means we need to temper our expectations with what these agents can do if it’s humans driving it, and you have three layers of approval and all the other machinery of a large corporation. The implementation part is only a small segment of it. The other thing I’d say is that most organizations don’t know what they want. They don’t know how to make it better. They’re not bottlenecked on implementation. They’re bottlenecked on ideas. They’re bottlenecked on vision. They’re bottlenecked on taste. And if you don’t have those elements in excess of your implementational capacity, it doesn’t help. So you can make a lot of shitty ideas come true, then what? Are you gonna ship that? That sounds like, I don’t know, something coming out of Microsoft. That’s not what we’re trying to replicate here. That process is not actually… Because we already had this. If you step back for a moment and think of the towering organizations we have who have had tens of thousands of programmers at their disposal. I mean, I’m picking on Microsoft here. I love Microsoft some of the time, but I’ll pick on them in this case because they have had endless resources, endless programming capacity for decades, right? This is what’s showing us that just being able to write a lot of code does not produce great compelling software. Now, the other thing is we’ve had this capacity for about six months. That’s not very long in human life cycle capacity of internalizing what’s going on. And I think it’s actually funny that the critique of AI is, why isn’t it going faster? What are you talking about? We’ve not had any other form of progress that has moved as fast as AI, and you’re impatient because in the last three months we haven’t rewritten the whole world and made it a utopia of software goodness?

[译文暂缺] Multiple reasons. I’ll start with the first one that’s the most critical. As soo [译文暂缺] productivity goes to die. The revelation I’ve had working on Omarchy the last th [译文暂缺] And on the one hand, that’s a bit of a bummer. I mean, I like humans, and it’s g [译文暂缺] know how to make it better. They’re not bottlenecked on implementation. They’re [译文暂缺] That sounds like, I don’t know, something coming out of Microsoft. That’s not wh [译文暂缺] endless resources, endless programming capacity for decades, right? This is what [译文暂缺] And I think it’s actually funny that the critique of AI is, why isn’t it going f

You’re basically saying everybody should be switching to Linux now. One of the arguments is, like, we can rewrite all the software that’s not available in Linux in Linux. Linux has been the love of my life for many years, but one of the reasons I’m still attached to Windows and now Mac is because of video editing, Premiere.

[译文暂缺] You’re basically saying everybody should be switching to Linux now. One of the a

We’re gonna fix that. But-

[译文暂缺] We’re gonna fix that. But-

So the question is, who’s gonna build Premiere and Photoshop for Linux? And it feels like one person can now.

[译文暂缺] So the question is, who’s gonna build Premiere and Photoshop for Linux? And it f

100% one person can.

[译文暂缺] 100% one person can.

And so, and I’m allowed to be impatient. In fact, me or anyone else, impatience is the first step of doing it yourself, right? Like-

[译文暂缺] And so, and I’m allowed to be impatient. In fact, me or anyone else, impatience

Correct.

[译文暂缺] Correct.

… and there’s a community of tens of thousands of people that use Adobe Premiere or DaVinci, all these non-linear video editors, that know the frustrations. Everybody shares them. You can look at Reddit. You can look at the forums. Everybody knows it. I don’t know what it is. It may be the management. It may be the meetings. All the things you’ve always discussed is the bureaucracy that’s inside companies that’s slowing everything down in the development of features. But it feels like there– if you just let some of the developers loose with a bunch of agents, you can fix all that. But again, based on everything you’re saying, maybe the way to do that is to start over from scratch, maybe through open source, or somebody launches a new company, that within large companies now it’s hard to really accelerate into the agentic era by letting developers just build.

[译文暂缺] … and there’s a community of tens of thousands of people that use Adobe Premiere [译文暂缺] development of features. But it feels like there– if you just let some of the de

This is the classic innovator’s dilemma. These companies have gotten so good, so established at the old way, and therefore their entire structure, management layers, processes are tuned for a time that no longer exists. But you can’t pivot that. These are super tankers. It just doesn’t happen. This is why we’re finally getting this upset in the technology industry. For a while, I was very upset about the duopoly between Apple and Google on mobile, because it felt like mobile was the most important computing platform that we had, and I could not see a path to unseat either Google or Apple sitting on top of that, controlling everything, taking their toll booth money. But the game has changed. This is no longer the most important platform. Mobile phones are important, but there’s also a lot of other form factors coming, whether it’s glasses or it’s earpieces or whatever else have you. It’s all in play now, but the computing platforms themselves are in play for the first time in probably 40 years, if you look at the desktop. Linux has been around since ’91. It’s not taken off or taken over on the desktop. It’s taken over everything else. All the devices you have on your desk, your fridge, your toaster, everything runs Linux except for your computer. Now, funnily enough, your Android is actually Linux, but wrapped so sufficiently that you can’t really recognize it. But now there’s an opening, and the opening is exactly as you say it. If there’s a piece of software you depended on that bound you to Windows, it is completely within reach for you personally to start rewriting it. And maybe you won’t get to 100% coverage, but this is the old joke about Microsoft Office. “I only use 5%.” Yeah, well, we all use a different 5%. Well, what if we all just build our own 5%? What if I just took the functionality that I need and just did that? That is a completely different challenge and one agents are incredibly capable of doing right now today, and I’ve done it a lot of times over. So one of the amazing things I’ve found with the latest agent engaged is I have become a polyglot programmer, something I was absolutely not before. I was a Ruby programmer- … first and foremost, and then I dabbled a little bit in Bash- … when I had to. And in the last two months, I’ve written C++. I’ve written three applications that have shipped in Omarchy Quattro. I wrote a writing app. I was using this app called Typora, which is a very nice app-

[译文暂缺] This is the classic innovator’s dilemma. These companies have gotten so good, so [译文暂缺] mobile, because it felt like mobile was the most important computing platform th [译文暂缺] Mobile phones are important, but there’s also a lot of other form factors coming [译文暂缺] fridge, your toaster, everything runs Linux except for your computer. Now, funni [译文暂缺] If there’s a piece of software you depended on that bound you to Windows, it is [译文暂缺] and one agents are incredibly capable of doing right now today, and I’ve done it [译文暂缺] … when I had to. And in the last two months, I’ve written C++. I’ve written thre

Great, great app

[译文暂缺] Great, great app

… which in itself is based on another app called iA Writer, which was my real love on the Mac- … for a clean, simple Markdown writing environment. That’s where I write all my essays. And then I moved to Linux, and I couldn’t get iA Writer, so I moved over to this other tool called Typora. It was a piece of shareware, and it had a lot of features I just didn’t need. And about six weeks, seven weeks ago, I thought, “Do you know what? I only need 5% of Typora,” which is already a basic app. I literally told the agent to get going, that I wanted it written in C++ and Qt, because that would fit well with the aesthetic of what I was building with Quattro. And in, I think, about 20 minutes, it had the first version. I started using it, and it wasn’t quite right. Within two days, I’d given up Typora, and I wrote and have written all of my essays since that moment in Omawrite.

[译文暂缺] … which in itself is based on another app called iA Writer, which was my real lo [译文暂缺] And then I moved to Linux, and I couldn’t get iA Writer, so I moved over to this [译文暂缺] was building with Quattro. And in, I think, about 20 minutes, it had the first v

Can I ask for your advice and your vision about something? So what I find with agents, you can actually write something like a replacement for Typora that is perfectly customized to you, to your needs- … with just one user in mind. And then there’s a version of that that starts with one user in mind but expands to a larger audience. So I’ve actually written a large number of software just for me, and I find it easier to do and better to get my situation done. For example, I have a video editor I’ve written, which is very easy to do just for me. I’ve never, unlike you, built something that’s used by a large number of people, and I find that a bit scary and intimidating. So, like, at this, with this agentic age, how do you take a step to actually build something that solves your problem, which I think is a beautiful way to build, but also expand it to actually useful for other people? Like, is there advice you can give, and do you also see the problem of how easy it is to just build a tool for yourself?

[译文暂缺] Can I ask for your advice and your vision about something? So what I find with a [译文暂缺] situation done. For example, I have a video editor I’ve written, which is very e [译文暂缺] I’ve never, unlike you, built something that’s used by a large number of people, [译文暂缺] tool for yourself?

Yes, but it is simpler than you think. By the time you’re done building the tool for yourself, you simply tell your agent to put it on GitHub. You don’t even have to do anything else. It will figure out how to put that repo on GitHub. It’ll write a nice README. It’ll start using GitHub releases so that you can track things. It’ll actually be a better software maintainer than you could ever be- … because it is far more patient, it is far more diligent in doing the drudgery of managing open source software than you are. And you can simply get on with the joy of using the software that you built and evolving it as you see fit. Now, this gets into the big argument we’ve been having in open source for a while. Are AI contributions good or bad for the maintainer? There’s a lot of maintainers right now who are quite upset about the fact that they’re suddenly getting a huge influx of pull requests, of contributions from people who may not be the best programmers or programmers at all- … towards their software. I look at that argument and go, “Are you kidding me?” Here is a vein of free contributions that you can take or don’t take, but you’re complaining about the fact that they’re there? It sounds straight out of- My steak is too juicy and my lobster too buttery. What are you complaining about? This is the most amazing thing. This is what we proclamated for so long was going to be the magic of open source, that we could all contribute to it, but it was, of course, never true. There was only a small subset of people who contribute to open source, and that was the very highly skilled wizards. So this is a bit of a reformation moment. We had this disintermediation between us and the computer, and it was this class of clerics and priests called programmers, and suddenly they’re being disintermediated here by was it the 95 theses by Luther in 1500s, nailing them to the door? And one of those was very clearly about the intermediation, that you should have direct access to the higher intelligence.

[译文暂缺] Yes, but it is simpler than you think. By the time you’re done building the tool [译文暂缺] diligent in doing the drudgery of managing open source software than you are. [译文暂缺] And you can simply get on with the joy of using the software that you built and [译文暂缺] programmers at all- … towards their software. I look at that argument and go, “A [译文暂缺] This is the most amazing thing. This is what we proclamated for so long was goin [译文暂缺] called programmers, and suddenly they’re being disintermediated here by was it t

But don’t you need the wizards to keep a high bar of excellence in the code base?

[译文暂缺] But don’t you need the wizards to keep a high bar of excellence in the code base

100% you do, which is also something that’s always been true about open source, which is the second argument that really grinds me. I’ve been running open source projects for 25 years. I have literally looked at the output of thousands, if not tens of thousands of programmers. I feel like I have the statistical basis to assert that most programmers, they suck. And I don’t mean that in the way it sounds. That was why I paused for a hot second here. I mean, they suck in the sense that they don’t write the code I want to have written. They don’t prepare their bug reports with all the relevant information. They don’t detail their pull requests with the why. They don’t bother to fill in needed code comments. They don’t double-check their work. They don’t write unit tests. They don’t do all of these things it takes to create good software. But do you know who’ll do all that stuff? Agents, if you tell them to. They’re very diligent at following your instructions, most of the time, sometimes to a fault. But it actually means that if you take the median programmer and their pull requests towards an average open source project, they’re already getting outclassed by agents. I would rather get an agent-written pull request to one of my projects than I’d get one written by a human, and it’s not just because the quality’s better. It’s also because I feel a lot less bad if I just reject it. You didn’t even write it, so I can simply look at what your agent wrote on your behalf and go, “Eh, don’t want it.” That’s always been true in open source, and in fact, I think this is one of the problems with open source maintainers. They have way too much ball of neuroticism and anxiety that requires them to look upon any contribution as an obligation on their part to do everything to get that to land in the code base. That’s not true at all. You can simply say, “No,” or even better, you can say, “No thank you.” And if you get into the mode of realizing that your project is allowed to exist and evolve according to your vision, according to your roadmap, it becomes so much easier in the agentic age to decline the contributions you don’t want because you don’t even inconvenience or hurt the feelings of a human. It’s just a clanker, and the clanker won’t mind. In fact, the producers of clankers, the labs, love when you spend tokens in vain. They get paid just the same. So, in my opinion, this is the absolute best time to ever have been an open source software maintainer. Not only do we get this wealth of glorious pull requests made by agents with all the boxes ticked, we also get to tap into a creativity of people who did not have access to contribute to a project before. I’ve been running the Omarchy project now for a little over a year, and in the last three months working on Quattro, I have merged over 1,000 pull requests. Quite a lot of those pull requests were written by people who were not classical programmers, or were programmers in other domains, not Linux operating system or distribution development. They were able to contribute their good ideas because of agents, and I got to cherry-pick the very best of that- … because it was there. Otherwise, those ideas would just have lived inside their heads. Again, is that not the purpose of open source, that we tap into the collective intelligence and creativity of the whole goddamn planet, and we channel that towards a commons where we all benefit from the combined efforts of everyone? Now, there’s currently, I think, about 400 unmerged pull requests on Omarchy, about double what it was a week ago. So the acceleration is real, but so are the tools. I’m not reviewing every pull request anymore. I haven’t been reviewing them for quite some time now. I have the agents- … review them for me- … and then they will give me a summary about whether something is ready for the decision, the human decision. Should we merge or should we not merge? I don’t need to look at all the pull requests that are either wrong, duplicated, bad. An agent can sort that chaff away from me. I just get to look at the pearls- … the good ideas that are ready to go, the bug fixes that the agent has validated in a VM on my behalf. All the drudgery of replicating and managing open source projects is evaporating at lightning speed, and we are left with the golden juicy parts, the bone marrow of software development- … deciding what should this thing do and where should it go?

[译文暂缺] 100% you do, which is also something that’s always been true about open source, [译文暂缺] That was why I paused for a hot second here. I mean, they suck in the sense that [译文暂缺] know who’ll do all that stuff? Agents, if you tell them to. They’re very diligen [译文暂缺] I would rather get an agent-written pull request to one of my projects than I’d [译文暂缺] maintainers. They have way too much ball of neuroticism and anxiety that require [译文暂缺] You can simply say, “No,” or even better, you can say, “No thank you.” And if yo [译文暂缺] clankers, the labs, love when you spend tokens in vain. They get paid just the s [译文暂缺] Not only do we get this wealth of glorious pull requests made by agents with all [译文暂缺] programmers, or were programmers in other domains, not Linux operating system or [译文暂缺] … because it was there. Otherwise, those ideas would just have lived inside thei [译文暂缺] acceleration is real, but so are the tools. I’m not reviewing every pull request [译文暂缺] I don’t need to look at all the pull requests that are either wrong, duplicated, [译文暂缺] development- … deciding what should this thing do and where should it go?

Do you think the good ideas, ultimately the kernel of the good ideas originated in the human mind, so the individual contributors Like, can it be done by agents, or is the PR ultimately requires a human idea? Like how to improve Omarchy, all those incoming… Or can it all just be a pool of agents?

你认为这些好点子，最终的好点子的核心是起源于人类的头脑，那么个人贡献者，比如，它可以由代理完成吗，还是最终公关确实需要一个人类的想法？比如如何改进 Omarchy，所有这些到来的……或者这一切都可以只是一个代理池吗？

That was the mode and the way I was thinking about agents in the first agentic age from November 24 to February 28. I thought all the ideas would originate with the humans. They would tell their agents what to build, and off they went. I don’t think that’s true anymore at all. I have seen things you people wouldn’t believe, ideas coming out of models so great that it makes me humble- … as a person who otherwise prides himself on having good ideas. The agents are incredibly capable of creative thought, and folks who are still stuck in the analysis that agents are parrots- … just regurgitating the ideas that are already there, are delusional about the progress that’s been made in the last six to nine months.

那是我从 11 月 24 日到 2 月 28 日期间，在第一个能动时代中对代理人思考的模式和方式。我原以为所有的想法都会由人类产生。他们会告诉他们的代理人要建立什么，然后代理人就去做。我现在一点也不这么认为了。我见过一些你们难以相信的事情，模型产生的想法如此伟大，让我感到谦卑——作为一个平时以自己有好点子自豪的人来说。这些代理人具有令人难以置信的创造性思维能力，而那些仍然困在认为代理人只是鹦鹉——只是重复已有想法的分析中的人，对于过去六到九个月所取得的进展，是完全错觉的。

So some people listening to you right now will say DHH is suffering from the old case of AI psychosis. Can you steel man the case that you are in fact experiencing in a state of delusion, like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and can you argue against it?

所以现在有些听你的人会说 DHH 正在经历老式的 AI 精神错乱病例。你能强力陈述一下你实际上正处于妄想状态的案例，就像《飞越杜鹃窝》那样，并且你能反驳它吗？

I’m in a state of delirium. That’s the state I’m in. Because I have been working with computers for 40 years, and I’ve never seen the things that I’ve seen in just the last two months. A whole career, a whole life dedicating to the love of computers as my main focus for the working hours and then some, suddenly completely upended, suddenly completely rewritten. Of course I’m delirious. Who looking at this reality is not? If you are not delirious or at the very least very excited… Actually, I guess that’s not even true. If you’re not recognizing the gravity of the moment, that’s the delusion. That’s the psychosis. The psychosis is believing that the world is barely different. We just have some electronic parrots reciting things to us. Now, in my opinion, the reason this argument is actually brought up is because people are not able to see the fruits of the progress. That goes to your point earlier. Where is the amazing software? Why isn’t American GDP running at 12% year over year? First of all, give it a minute. It hasn’t even been a year, goddammit. But second of all, I feel on my own account, I have actually brought the pudding. Omarchy Quattro launched on Friday. It’s been downloaded by tens of thousands of people. And they like it. They like it a lot.

我处于一种迷乱状态。这就是我现在的状态。因为我已经从事计算机工作 40 年了，而我在过去的两个月里看到的事情，是我以前从未见过的。 整整一生的职业生涯，整整一个人生都投入到对计算机的热爱上，把它作为工作时间的主要关注点，甚至更多，但现在突然被完全颠覆，突然被完全重写。当然，我现在欣喜若狂。面对这种现实，谁不会呢？如果你没有欣喜若狂，或者至少非常兴奋……实际上，我想这甚至不是真的。如果你没有意识到这一刻的严重性，那才是错觉。那才是精神错乱。精神错乱就是相信这个世界几乎没有变化。我们只是有一些电子鹦鹉在为我们背诵东西。现在，在我看来，这个论点之所以会被提出，实际上是因为人们无法看到进步的成果。这也呼应了你之前的观点。令人惊叹的软件在哪里？ 为什么美国的国内生产总值（GDP）同比增长没有达到 12%？首先，请耐心一点。甚至还不到一年，该死的。其次，就我个人而言，我实际上已经带来了成果。Omarchy Quattro 在星期五发布了。它被成千上万的人下载。他们喜欢它。他们非常喜欢它。

We should mention that going to Perplexity here, Omarchy is a highly opinionated Arch Linux-based desktop distribution centered on the Hyprland Wayland tiling compositor. It was created by David Heinemeier Hansson, DHH, as a polished developer workstation set up with a cohesive visual style and many everyday tools already configured.

我们应该提到，在这里使用 Perplexity，Omarchy 是一个高度有观点的基于 Arch Linux 的桌面发行版，以 Hyprland Wayland 瓷砖式窗口管理器为核心。它由 David Heinemeier Hansson（DHH）创建，作为一个经过打磨的开发者工作站，配备了统一的视觉风格和许多已配置好的日常工具。

Let me put it. Omarchy is a beautiful, modern, and opinionated Linux system. It’s an alternative operating system to macOS and Windows, and it’s freaking amazing.

让我来说明一下。Omarchy 是一个美观、现代且有自己见解的 Linux 系统。它是 macOS 和 Windows 的替代操作系统，而且非常棒。

And the Quattro thing is you’re pushing towards the age of agents.

而 Quattro 的意思是你正在推动迈向代理人的时代。

That’s right. That’s the latest version that we just dropped out, which is also funny. The Omarchy project is only a year old and a little bit. I started it last summer in between sessions at the 24 Hours of Le Mans- … where I had watched one too many YouTube videos on Linux Ricing and got bitten by that bug. Started working on this second iteration of my attempt at creating a better Linux operating system. The first iteration we talked about last time was called Omakub, was built on top of an existing system called Ubuntu, and it was fine. But the ambition I was able to pour into the new version, Omarchy, because I started seven layers deeper down the stack, was completely different. But it was still done in a pre-agentic world. I wrote all those bash scripts by hand in the beginning, and then I got to see the midway point where things changed over. I did a couple of versions of Omarchy that had partial agent acceleration, and then three months ago, it was full throttle, 100%, everything is written by agents but steered by me. And that just ended up being a very different experience and a very different operating system because I was suddenly granted a limitless ceiling on my ambition. I could look at any feature in Windows, on Mac, on other Linux systems and say, “I want that,” and the agents would deliver. So everything I wanted was suddenly within reach, which meant that I got a little delirious. Who would not get delirious if suddenly a genie pops out of the bottle and says, “You can have whatever you want. Every feature you’ve ever dreamed of in an operating system- … I can deliver them to you, most of them in five minutes, a few in 20, and if we really go hog wild, it’s gonna take me two hours.”

没错。那是我们刚发布的最新版本，这也很有趣。Omarchy 项目只有一年多一点。我是去年夏天在勒芒 24 小时比赛的间隙开始它的—— ……那时我看了太多关于 Linux 美化（Ricing）的 YouTube 视频，被这种兴趣点燃了。我开始着手第二次尝试创建一个更好的 Linux 操作系统。上次我们谈到的第一次尝试叫 Omakub，是在一个叫 Ubuntu 的现有系统基础上构建的，也还可以。但我能在新版本 Omarchy 中倾注的野心完全不同，因为我开始从堆栈下方七层更深的地方入手。但它仍然是在一个前代理的世界里完成的。一开始我手工编写了所有那些 bash 脚本，然后我看到中途节点，事情开始发生变化。 我做了几个版本的 Omarchy，带有部分代理加速，然后三个月前，它达到了全速，100%，所有内容都由代理编写，但由我来引导。结果，这变成了一个非常不同的体验和完全不同的操作系统，因为我突然获得了对我野心的无限上限。我可以查看 Windows、Mac 或其他 Linux 系统中的任何功能，然后说：“我想要那个”，代理就会实现。所以我想要的一切突然都触手可及，这意味着我有点兴奋得发狂。如果突然有个精灵从瓶子里跳出来说：“你可以拥有你想要的一切。你曾经梦想过的操作系统中的每一个功能——谁会不兴奋发狂呢？” ……我可以把它们交给你，大多数五分钟就能完成，少数需要二十分钟，如果我们真的放开手脚的话，可能要花我两个小时。

Mm-hmm. Have you seen Requiem for a Dream, the movie? So there’s a drug-like effect here. I find it personally– We’ll talk about many levels of this, but it is overwhelming how much power is placed in our hands so suddenly, and it’s very hard to know, it’s like with “The Hobbit” or something, what to do with it, and I find myself truly overwhelmed with the multitasking on the verge of almost burnt out. Super excited about so many things, but ultimately looking back, you want to focus on one thing and really ship.

嗯哼。你看过《梦之安魂曲》这部电影吗？所以这里有一种类似药物的效果。我个人觉得——我们会谈到很多层面，但把这么多权力突然交到我们手中是压倒性的，而且很难知道该怎么办，就像《霍比特人》之类的，你该如何处理它，我发现自己真的被多任务处理压得快要精疲力尽。对许多事情都非常兴奋，但最终回头看，你还是想专注于一件事，并真正把它完成。

I don’t have that sense. I don’t have the sense of overwhelm. I don’t have the sense of dread. I don’t have the sense of distortion because I have a mission. I’m going somewhere, and therefore, I can channel all this new power towards-

我没有那种感觉。我没有被压倒的感觉。我没有恐惧的感觉。我没有扭曲的感觉，因为我有一个使命。我正在前往某个地方，因此，我可以把所有这些新的力量引向——

Yeah, it’s wonderful.

是的，真棒。

a singular goal and outcome, creating the perfect computer. And therefore, all my investigations with AI are focused towards that end. Now, I also have a day job. And we also use agents there, and that’s also targeted towards sort of specific outcomes. But with the Omarchy experience, I got to tap in straight in the back of my head and increase the bandwidth between ideas arriving in my brain and software emerging on the screen. It was like going from dial-up- … to fiber. I think on your podcast, Elon talked about the actual human bandwidth- … that Neuralink and other projects are trying to accelerate. Like, the bandwidth we’re communicating over right now is quite low because we’re limited by our cognition. We’re limited by the rate of speech. You’re not limited by those things when you’re working with a swarm of agents. Now, let me caveat this by saying, if I’d heard myself talk like this- nine months ago, I would probably have used the label AI psychosis. I think it would be fitting because nine months ago when people were talking like this, they weren’t shipping, and I think that’s the ultimate difference, that there were people who saw this early. I was not actually that early. As we’ve talked about, I was rather skeptical, and I was using AI in certain ways, but I was not the first person who downloaded Claude Code. I think Boris released that in end of February. I don’t think I installed Claude Code until September. So there was about six months there where pioneers saw these glimmers of what the future was gonna look like. It wasn’t there yet because the intelligence wasn’t there. The harnesses weren’t there, but they could see the glimmers. I couldn’t. Tobi, Tobi Lutke, the CEO of Shopify and now my partner in crime on this Omarchy project in part, he’s gotten pilled with Omarchy as well. He saw these things very early, and he tried to tell me, and I wasn’t seeing it. I was not seeing what he was seeing.

一个单一的目标和结果，打造完美的计算机。因此，我所有与人工智能的调查都朝着这个目标展开。现在，我还有一份日常工作。我们也在那里使用代理，这些都是针对特定结果的。但在 Omarchy 的经历中，我可以直接在脑海深处输入，增加脑海中涌现的想法和屏幕上出现的软件之间的带宽。这就像是从拨号上网......切换到光纤。我记得在你的播客中，埃隆谈到了实际的人类带宽—— ……这是 Neuralink 和其他项目试图加快的。就像，我们现在交流的带宽相当低，因为我们的认知有限。我们的交流速度受限于说话速度。当你与一个智能体群合作时，你就不会受这些限制。现在，我得补充一句，如果我听到自己这样说话—— 九个月前，我可能会使用“AI 精神病”这个标签。我认为这很贴切，因为九个月前，当人们这样谈论时，他们并没有真正去发布产品，而我认为这是最终的区别：有些人很早就看到了这一点。而我实际上并不算早。正如我们所谈的，我当时相当怀疑，并且在某些方面使用 AI，但我不是第一个下载 Claude Code 的人。我记得 Boris 是在二月底发布的。我大概直到九月才安装 Claude Code。所以大约有六个月的时间，那些先行者看到了未来的曙光。它还没有真正出现，因为智能还不够成熟，应用也不完善，但他们能看到一些迹象。而我看不到。 托比，托比·卢特克，Shopify 的 CEO，现在也是我在这个部分 Omarchy 项目中的合作伙伴，他也被 Omarchy 的理念所吸引。他很早就看到了这些事情，并试图告诉我，但我当时没有看到。我没有看到他所看到的东西。

You were a hater.

你是一个讨厌的人。

Yes. I was still on Earth. And he was… He had already boarded the rocket and was heading towards space. I remember actually reading his memo to the company, the AI memo, and thinking, “Ah, seems a little much.” Like, you’re making a big deal out of something that I cannot yet feel is a tangible thing. Because where’s the output of this? I try using it. It writes code I don’t like. It wants to interrupt me all the time. Where are you getting this from? So I get it. I totally get it. If you’ve not seen what the current quality of intelligence can produce, of course you’re gonna look at someone and go like, “They sound a little nutty,” because all your experience up until this point would tell you that they are nutty. Because if you look at the history of computer programming, for the last 40, 50 years, people have been promising that regular people could write code just by talking. We’re gonna have fourth generation languages. Lisp was once upon a time presented, Smalltalk was presented as these environments that would let regular people write their own applications, and none of it came true in the sense beyond, like, Microsoft Access databases or Excel spreadsheets. Those are end user programming environments, but it’s nothing like what we’re able to do now. And then, I mean, I’m not even talking about end user. I’m talking as me, someone who’s been programming for 25 years, seeing the output and the acceleration and the quality and then shipping it, and I think that’s what’s gonna change the entire conversation quite quickly. The few laggards who are still on the fence about whether this is actually useful, who are still trapped in a meme from early ’25 about mechanical parrots, they’re simply going to be overwhelmed by the evidence that’s about to flood over them.

是的。我还在地球上。而他……他已经登上了火箭，正前往太空。我记得实际上读过他给公司的备忘录，那份关于人工智能的备忘录，然后我想，‘啊，这似乎有点过头了。’就像，你把一些我尚未感觉到是具体的事情搞得很重要一样。 因为这的输出在哪里？我试着使用它。它写的代码我不喜欢。它总是想打断我。你从哪里得到这个的？所以我明白了。我完全明白。如果你没看到当前智能所能产生的质量，当然你会看着某个人然后想，“他们听起来有点神经”，因为到目前为止你的所有经验都会告诉你他们是神经的。因为如果你看看计算机编程的历史，在过去的 40、50 年里，人们一直承诺普通人只需说话就能写代码。我们将拥有第四代语言。 Lisp 曾经被提出过，Smalltalk 也被提出过，作为那些可以让普通人编写自己应用程序的环境，但这些设想都没有真正实现，除了类似 Microsoft Access 数据库或 Excel 电子表格这样的东西。这些都是面向最终用户的编程环境，但和我们现在能够做到的完全不同。而且，我的意思是，我甚至不是在谈论最终用户。我是以我自己的身份来说，作为一个有 25 年编程经验的人，看到输出、速度、质量，然后发布它的过程，我认为这将会非常迅速地改变整个讨论。 那些仍然对这是否真正有用持犹豫态度的少数落后者，那些仍然困在 25 年初关于机械鹦鹉的梗中的人，他们很快将被即将涌向他们的大量证据所压倒。

So I hope to see projects like Omarchy, several of them that, like, really show agent first.

所以我希望看到像 Omarchy 这样的项目，其中有几个真的把代理放在首位。

It’s coming. All of it is coming.

它来了。所有的都来了。

In the spaces, in the silly spaces that I already mentioned, like video editing, all these kinds of apps that are like Typora- … this kind of stuff.

在那些空间里，在我已经提到过的那些愚蠢的空间里，比如视频编辑，所有这些类似 Typora 的应用程序……这种东西。

It’s gonna come, and I’ve already seen the early inklings of this. One of the really neat features about Omarchy is that it has a far more robust plugin system that allows you to extend your operating system and rewrite it really in terms of its user interface and its panels and its features by creating your own plugins that can be cloned off of tools we ship in the box. For example, say you want a different calendar. Omarchy ships with a calendar. You click the little clock. It pops up a calendar, and it doesn’t have iCal support, for example. It doesn’t consume your appointments. There’s about 17 implementations of that already, and in three days, we had 330 plugins on the Omarchy plugin marketplace. I have never seen growth like that with any project I’ve ever been involved in. I’ve never seen participation that broadly. I’ve never seen that many people be able to create software that’s meaningful for them—also be usable for others so quickly. All of it is driven by the fact that Omarchy ships a set of skills that tells any agent you bring to it how to create extensions to the operating system, and therefore affording you the vision of the true malleable… I was about to say agentic. I hate that fucking word. And the reason in part I hate that word is, first of all, it’s become marketing slop speak- … at this point. Like, it’s just slapped onto everything. I wish we had a different word that just meant AI doing stuff.

它会到来的，而且我已经看到了这一点的早期迹象。Omarchy 的一个非常棒的功能是，它有一个更强大的插件系统，允许你扩展你的操作系统，并通过创建你自己的插件来真正从用户界面、面板和功能的角度重写操作系统，这些插件可以从我们提供的工具中克隆出来。例如，假设你想要一个不同的日历。Omarchy 自带一个日历。你点击小钟，它会弹出一个日历，例如，它不支持 iCal，不会占用你的预约。已经有大约 17 个这样的实现方案了，在三天内，我们在 Omarchy 插件市场上就有了 330 个插件。我从未见过我参与的任何项目有过这样的增长。 我从未见过如此广泛的参与。我从未见过那么多人能够创建对自己有意义的软件——同时也能快速让其他人使用。这一切都是由 Omarchy 推出的一套技能驱动的，该技能可以告诉你带来的任何代理如何创建操作系统的扩展，因此让你能够实现真正可塑的愿景……我差点说出‘agentic’这个词。我讨厌那个他妈的词。我讨厌这个词的部分原因是，首先，它已经变成了营销术语……在这一点上。就像，它被随意贴到一切事物上。我希望我们有一个不同的词，仅仅意味着 AI 在做事情。

Vibe coding feels wrong, too.

凭感觉编码也感觉不对。

It does, because vibe coding to me smells exactly like script kiddies did in the early 2000s. People applying PHP scripts they just downloaded offline that they don’t understand anything of. And while, I mean, that’s true in the sense that much of the vibe coding, including my own vibe coded projects, and as I just mentioned, I have several. I’ve written things in C++. I’ve written things in Rust. Rust—I hate Rust with a passion. Rust to me is like pouring acid in my eyes when I have to look at the code.

确实如此，因为对我来说，vibe 编程闻起来就像 2000 年代早期的脚本小子。人们应用他们刚刚从网上下载下来的 PHP 脚本，而对这些脚本一无所知。虽然，我的意思是，从某种意义上说，这确实是真的，因为很多 vibe 编程，包括我自己的 vibe 编程项目，正如我刚才提到的，我有好几个。我写过 C++ 的程序，也写过 Rust 的程序。Rust——我非常讨厌 Rust。对我来说，Rust 就像在我必须看代码的时候往眼睛里倒酸液一样。

Wait, wait, wait, wait. Why do you hate Rust?

等，等，等，等。你为什么讨厌 Rust？

It is, in my opinion, the ugliest programming language-

在我看来，这是最丑陋的编程语言。

Oh

哦

… that has been invented-

……已经被发明出来的

Yeah

是的

… in probably the last 40 years.

……大概在过去的 40 年里。

So it’s the opposite of Rails and Ruby.

所以它和 Rails 及 Ruby 正好相反。

It’s the opposite. But-

恰恰相反。但是——

You’ve written it

你已经写好了

… I’ve written applications in Rust because the output of Rust is actually amazing. The memory safety, the fact that it’s a system language, the fact that it’s highly efficient and so forth is incredible. So Rust, to me, can both be the most repugnant programming language ever devised for human consumption and a wonderful platform for agentic engineering. These two truths can coexist easily in my head.

… 我已经用 Rust 编写了应用程序，因为 Rust 的输出实际上非常惊人。内存安全、它作为系统语言的特性、它的高效性等等，都令人难以置信。所以对我来说，Rust 既可能是人类使用的最令人厌恶的编程语言，也可能是一个极好的自主工程平台。这两个事实在我脑海中可以轻松共存。

Do you think that there can be a point at which we can just call agentic engineering programming? Can we just change what programming means? ‘Cause who’s actually going to be programming the old-school way in a few months?

你认为是否有可能出现一种情况，我们可以直接称之为代理工程编程？我们能否只是改变编程的含义？因为几个月后谁还会以老派方式进行编程呢？

I don’t think we should reuse the term because for me, programming implies an understanding of certain primitives, loops, conditions, variables. All the constructs of programming languages are what constitutes programming itself, not the creation of programs. Because you could say in the pre-agentic era, well, your CEO is programming. He’s hiring a bunch of programmers, he’s telling them what to do, and out comes software that he can sell. Eh, I don’t think most people would call that CEO a programmer, and I don’t think we should call the vibe coder a programmer either. And vibe coding, if we define it here, is you tell an agent to build software for you. You do not look at the implementation. That, to me, is what separates vibe coding from programming or, let’s say, agent-accelerated development.

我认为我们不应该重复使用这个术语，因为对我来说，编程意味着理解某些基本元素、循环、条件、变量。所有编程语言的构造才是构成编程本身的内容，而不是程序的创建。因为你可以说，在前代理时代，你的首席执行官也在编程。他雇佣了一群程序员，告诉他们该做什么，然后就会出现他可以销售的软件。 嗯，我不认为大多数人会称那个 CEO 为程序员，我也不认为我们应该把 vibe coder 称为程序员。如果我们在这里定义 vibe coding，那就是你让一个代理为你构建软件。你不需要查看实现细节。对我来说，这就是 vibe coding 与编程，或者说是代理加速开发的区别所在。

But don’t you think, so to push back a little bit, don’t you think a programmer, old-school programmer, you, doing agentic engineering is a different kind of agentic engineering than a non-programmer doing agentic engineering? What I mean is, if you know what a for loop is, if you know what function programming is, if you know some of the basic good principles of software engineering, the way you do natural language-based agentic engineering will be different and more systematic, and the scale and the variety of things you can actually build is much bigger than a vibe coder.

但是你不觉得，为了稍微反驳一下，你不觉得一个程序员，老派程序员，你，进行自主性工程，会和一个非程序员进行自主性工程是不同类型的自主性工程吗？我的意思是，如果你知道什么是 for 循环，如果你知道函数式编程，如果你知道一些基本的软件工程良好原则，那么你进行基于自然语言的自主性工程的方式会不同而且更加系统化，你实际上可以构建的东西的规模和多样性会比一个随意编码的人大得多。

I’m just gonna extend the pro case here a little bit just for the sake of the argument.

我只是为了论证的目的，在这里稍微扩展一下支持方的观点。

Right.

对。

I actually think for a while it was to my deficit to know as much as I know about programming because I was instructing the agents to do things as I prescribed them to do, and they were very good at that. And in the first agentic moment, let’s not call it an era, it was something that lasted three, three months. Moment… In the first agentic moment, that felt very productive. I could get more productivity out of telling the agents what to do in the way I would’ve done it, and I used all of my experience as a programmer to do just that. Then I was a little late on the next moment, and the next moment allowed me, allowed anyone, to describe outcomes- … to describe problems to the agents and get better solutions than if you had a programmer prescribe the path.

我实际上认为，有一段时间我知道的编程知识对我来说反而是一种负担，因为我是按自己的方式指示代理去做事情，而他们在执行这些指令方面非常擅长。在第一个代理时刻——我们不叫它一个时代，它持续了大约三个月——那一刻让我感觉非常高效。我可以通过告诉代理做事的方式来获得更多的生产力，就像我自己会做的那样，我用我所有的编程经验来做到这一点。然后我赶上下一个时刻有点晚，而下一个时刻允许我，也允许任何人，向代理描述结果——描述问题，并获得比程序员指示路径更好的解决方案。

See, okay, so we’re having fun arguing here. Well, so are you suggesting that there’s problems for which programmers are worse than non-programmers at agentic engineering?

看，好吧，所以我们在这里争论得很开心。嗯，那么你的意思是说，有些问题程序员在主动工程方面比非程序员更差吗？

100%. And the reason I say that, let’s define it here. The reason I say that is there’s a lot of programmers who are not very good product managers. Software is product management. What should it do? Who should it do it for? How should it do it? How should it look? What’s our priorities? What do we start with first? What does version one include? All of those skills are not easily or equally distributed across all programmers. And in the agentic era where you are letting an agent, an AI, do the implementation, these are the skills you need. And I happen to sit in both camps, and this is why I love this moment. I still get to live a little bit in the old world where I look at the full implementation because there are domains and areas where I feel that still brings value, and then I also live in the future. And as I said, when I created AmaWrite, I’ve not looked at a single line of that C++. I actually made it a point to myself that I was gonna treat it as an experiment. This is 100% a black box. I will treat it as though I was any other user who had opinions about how their digital typewriter should work, and therefore felt like it was a fair experiment as if a writer of any other sort who had opinions about how software should be done and how it should work. As you mentioned, video editors who know exactly where they don’t like what Adobe Premiere’s doing and how it could be better, but don’t have the capacities to improve it- … how that could be.

100%。我之所以这么说，让我们在这里定义一下。之所以这么说，是因为很多程序员并不是很好的产品经理。软件就是产品管理。它应该做什么？应该为谁做？应该怎么做？应该长什么样？我们的优先级是什么？我们先从什么开始？版本一包括什么？所有这些技能并不是所有程序员都轻松或均等具备的。在你让一个代理，一个 AI，来执行实现的代理时代，这些正是你需要的技能。我恰好站在两个阵营中，这就是为什么我喜欢这个时刻的原因。 我仍然可以在旧世界中生活一点，在那里我会查看完整的实现，因为有些领域和方面我觉得仍然有价值，然后我也生活在未来。正如我所说，当我创建 AmaWrite 时，我没有看过任何一行 C++ 代码。我实际上对自己有个要求，那就是我要把它当作一个实验来对待。这是 100%的黑箱。我会把它当作任何其他用户一样来对待，他们对自己的数字打字机应该如何工作有自己的看法，因此感觉这是一个公平的实验，就像任何其他类型的作家对软件的开发和运行方式有看法一样。 正如你提到的，那些视频编辑人员清楚自己不喜欢 Adobe Premiere 的哪些功能以及它如何能做得更好，但没有能力去改进它……这可能是怎样的情况。

The pushback, though, I think what programmers do well, good programmers do well, is systematic design, like think in terms of systems- … and rigor. And I think still, and probably for a long time to come, even natural language-based control of agentic systems will require a certain kind of rigor. Not overly structured rigor, but really explain very specifically the goals of the system, how to do the verification, what kind of security testing. You wanna do all those kinds of things. Although then to push back on that, the system will… should be smart longer term.

不过，我认为程序员擅长的是系统化设计，优秀的程序员做得很好，比如从系统的角度思考……以及严谨性。我认为，即便是基于自然语言的智能系统控制，在很长一段时间内仍然需要某种程度的严谨性。不是过度结构化的严谨，而是需要非常具体地解释系统的目标、如何进行验证、进行哪种类型的安全测试。你需要做所有这些事情。虽然对这一点进行反思的话，该系统……从长期来看应该是智能的。

I would’ve said the same thing six months ago.

六个月前我也会说同样的话。

Yeah, so this has changed.

是的，所以这已经改变了。

And I think the same thing would’ve been true six months ago. What I have found since, especially even just the last few weeks of the agentically accelerated development of Mach-E, is that more often than not, I have the humility to recognize that the agent knows best.

我认为六个月前情况也是一样。自那以后，尤其是在过去几周 Mach-E 在智能代理推动下加速发展的过程中，我发现更多时候，我有谦逊去认识到代理最清楚情况。

You can legitimately say, “Make sure it’s secure.”

你可以合法地说，‘确保它是安全的。’

Correct. And it would know more about what that entails. Now, you’re laughing-

正确。而且它会更了解那意味着什么。现在，你在笑——

What a crazy world.

多么疯狂的世界。

… but it’s true. And in fact-

……但这是真的。事实上——

Oh my God.

哦，我的天啊。

… a good parallel to this is the AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md files. There was a hot moment where it was all the rage about micro-optimizing that. Oh, you tell your agent this- … you tell your agent that, and you ended up with this huge file of instructions for your agent. One of the things that Boris, working on Claude Code, shared in an interview recently about Opus 5 was that the system prompt that they ship for Opus 5, and presumably also Fable, shrunk by 80% because the agent not only needed far less human instruction, it was actually being damaged by overly prescriptive humans. And any programmer who’s had a pointy-haired boss knows exactly what that is like. When the boss walks into the room, doesn’t know anything, starts telling you how to program, how to code. What do you do? You sulk. You write shittier code if you’re mandated to do things that are against your better judgment. Why would an agent not be the same?

…一个很好的类比是 AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md 文件。有一段时间，微优化这些文件非常流行。哦，你告诉你的代理这个—— ……你把这些告诉你的代理，然后你就得到了这个庞大的代理指令文件。Boris 最近在一次关于 Opus 5 的采访中分享了他在 Claude Code 工作时的一个情况，他提到他们为 Opus 5（大概也包括 Fable）提供的系统提示缩小了 80%，原因是代理不仅需要的人类指导少得多，而且过度规定的人工指导实际上对它有害。任何有过尖头发老板的程序员都知道这种感觉。当老板走进房间，什么都不懂，却开始教你如何编程、如何写代码时，你会怎么做？你会闷闷不乐。如果被迫去做违背你判断的事情，你写的代码也会更糟。为什么代理不会和人一样呢？

Actually, to push back against myself, I do find the actual skill I’m currently developing, which along those lines is probably what everybody’s trying to develop, is not to overspecify things, is to get out of the system’s way.

实际上，为了反驳自己，我确实发现我目前正在培养的实际技能，沿着这个方向，可能也是每个人都在努力培养的，就是不要过度具体化事物，而是要让系统顺其自然。

Of course.

当然。

Is to specify enough to provide a kinda high-level vision and guidance.

指定是否足以提供一种高层次的愿景和指导。

It’s even better because you don’t even need that. The fundamental insight of modern software development came from the agile software development movement. In the late ’90s, early 2000s, a group of smart, honest, and brave people came together and said, “The way we’ve been trying to do software development for the last 40 to 50 years has not worked, will not work. We’ve been trying to specify upfront what software should look like. We thought that we could ask humans what they wanted, write it all down, apply our systems thinking and our rigor to a spec sheet, hand that spec sheet over to a group of programmers who would then implement just that, and everyone would be happy.” Well, guess what? No one was happy. Because no one knows what they want until they receive it. You don’t know what a program should do until you play with it. So in the agentic age, you should resist the temptation to be overly specific upfront. Be as vague as you can to manifest something, then interact with the something. The way you arrive at good software is you write a little bit of software, and then you try to use it. It is in the process of using software that you discover what you really want. It’s where you discover what’s important and what’s not important. And agents are incredible at allowing you to bumble into this experience of realizing what you want because you don’t know what you want.

这甚至更好，因为你甚至不需要那个。现代软件开发的根本见解来自敏捷软件开发运动。上世纪 90 年代末到 2000 年代初，一群聪明、诚实且勇敢的人聚集在一起，说：“过去 40 到 50 年来我们试图进行软件开发的方式不起作用，也行不通。我们一直在尝试提前明确软件应该是什么样子。我们以为可以询问人们需要什么，把所有需求写下来，然后将我们的系统思维和严谨性应用到规格说明书上，再把这份规格说明书交给一群程序员，他们会按照规格实现，就这样，每个人都会满意。”好吧，结果呢？没有人满意。因为没有人知道自己想要什么，直到他们真正得到它。 你不会知道一个程序应该做什么，直到你去使用它。因此，在代理时代，你应该抵制一开始就过于具体的诱惑。尽可能模糊地去实现一些东西，然后再与这些东西互动。达到良好软件的方式是先写一点软件，然后尝试使用它。正是在使用软件的过程中，你才会发现自己真正想要的东西。这也是你发现什么重要、什么不重要的地方。而智能体在让你偶然体验到这种发现自己想要什么的过程中非常出色，因为你不知道自己想要什么。

Mm-hmm. And I’ve actually done something similar to what you suggested, which is implement different designs and totally different implementations, and then I create HTML pages for myself, PHP pages, where I vote on what I like more and so on.

嗯嗯。实际上我已经做过类似你建议的事情，也就是实现不同的设计和完全不同的实现，然后我为自己创建 HTML 页面、PHP 页面，在上面投票选择我更喜欢的设计，等等。

Yes.

是的。

And it does this iterative thing, and it’s very nice and fun. The interaction with the agentic system, if you create a nice interface for yourself, it can be super fun, and you’re focusing on the design part and the most fun parts of the design part.

它会做这个迭代的事情，非常好玩。如果你为自己创建了一个不错的界面，与自主系统的互动可以非常有趣，而且你可以专注于设计部分以及设计中最有趣的部分。

Correct. And this is what humans are really good at.

正确。这就是人类真正擅长的。

Yeah, taste.

是的，味道。

Differential evaluation. You give me three options, I pick one of them. Now, humans actually fall off a cliff if you give them 22 options. That’s the paradox of choice. But you give them three options, they very quickly within a split second will tell you what they like. There are all these ways that exploit the fact that humans will make these snap judgments that are actually pre-intellectual, right? Like, they’re coming from the gut, and then they arrive up in the brain, and the brain tries to rationalize why the gut said what it said. And if you’re willing to let go of some of that intellectual pre-processing rationalization and simply let your gut drive, the agentic age is a revelation.

差异化评估。你给我三个选项，我从中选择一个。实际上，如果给人类 22 个选项，他们真的会崩溃。这就是选择的悖论。但如果给他们三个选项，他们会在瞬间快速告诉你他们喜欢什么。有很多方法可以利用人类会做出这些实际上是先于理性的快速判断的事实，对吧？它们来自直觉，然后传到大脑，大脑试图为直觉说出的东西寻找理由。如果你愿意放弃一些智力上的预处理和理性化，仅仅让直觉驱动，那这个自主时代将是一种启示。

So this is a fascinating thing to ask you because you have sort of famously for a long time talked about, like, detailed chiseling of beautiful Rails Ruby code, and now you have switched in a matter of months to not doing that. So, like, what is your current setup look like? ‘Cause you’re, I assume, are still looking for the beauty, for the chiseling, for the crafting, but you’re just crafting in a different medium.

所以向你提这个问题非常有趣，因为你长期以来以详细雕琢漂亮的 Rails Ruby 代码而闻名，而现在你在几个月内就不再这样做了。那么，你现在的工作安排是什么样的？因为我假设你仍然在追求美感、雕琢和精心打磨，只是你在一种不同的媒介中进行创作。

And at different levels of abstraction. When I’m working in Ruby code, and we have a lot of Ruby code because it’s in our entire business, and I’m asking agents to make changes to that code, I still sweat the details. What I’m coming to realize is that the economic payoff of that sweat is diminishing rapidly. The reason why I, for 25 years, was sweating every line of code so judiciously was because I knew the payoff of keeping an architecture coherent and malleable was software that could change and evolve- … quickly with a small team, and not exorbitant cost, and not introducing a bunch of bugs when you change one thing over the other. That was the driving economic argument for why you should write beautiful code, ’cause beautiful code is easier to understand, it is simpler, it is more malleable. That was premised on humans doing the modifications. I think it is an open question to which degree this still matters. Now, it does matter, and the reason I say that, at least for the moment, is that tokens are still scarce. At this moment in time, we are all token limited. Well, not all, but anyone who doesn’t have endless budgets are token limited. So therefore, there is great payoff to writing systems that agents have an easier time dealing with and evolving without having to relearn the entire context. Just like humans, if they can make iterations and changes to the code base without wrecking the architecture, they can make the next change just as cheaply as the last one. And this is the classic ball of mud where you end up with a system that’s a ball of mud- … because it’s just put together in a way where nothing is connected and it’s just a real mess, right? I’ve seen that with agents, and I’ve seen it in our own code bases where, again, the first PR is, like, mediocre of quality, and then if you add another PR on top of that, and then five more down the line, it’s not very good, right? So there’s still a payoff to that, but that payoff is premised on our current moment. I am now able to… And this is, by the way, where the AI psychosis really comes in, when you try to extrapolate what nine months from now it’s gonna look like. What two years from now it’s gonna look like. But as an intellectual experiment, I think the first computer I used was a Commodore 64.

在不同的抽象层次上。当我在处理 Ruby 代码时，我们有大量的 Ruby 代码，因为它贯穿我们的整个业务，而我要求代理对这些代码进行修改时，我仍然会关注细节。我逐渐意识到的是，这种关注的经济回报正在迅速下降。我之所以在过去 25 年中如此谨慎地关注每一行代码，是因为我知道保持架构的一致性和可塑性的回报是软件能够不断变化和演进—— ……用一个小团队快速完成，而且成本不高，而且在你改动一个地方时不会引入一堆漏洞。这就是为什么你应该写优美代码的经济驱动理由，因为优美的代码更容易理解，更简单，更具可塑性。这是建立在人类进行修改的前提上的。我认为这个问题还未完全明确，究竟这一点在多大程度上依然重要。现在，它确实重要，我之所以这么说，至少在目前，是因为令牌仍然稀缺。此刻，我们所有人都受到令牌的限制。嗯，并不是所有人，但对于那些没有无限预算的人来说，他们受到令牌的限制。 因此，编写那些代理更容易处理和进化的系统，而无需重新学习整个上下文，是非常有回报的。就像人类一样，如果他们可以对代码库进行迭代和修改而不破坏架构，那么他们可以像上一次一样低成本地进行下一次修改。这就是典型的泥球——最终你会得到一个泥球般的系统。 ……因为它只是以一种没有任何联系的方式拼凑起来的，简直就是一团糟，对吧？我在代理那里见过这种情况，也在我们自己的代码库里见过，再次说明，第一次的 PR 质量是平平的，然后如果在它的基础上再加一个 PR，再加上五个下去，效果也不太好，对吧？所以这仍然是有回报的，但这种回报是以我们当前的时刻为前提的。我现在能够……顺便说一下，这正是 AI 精神错乱真正体现的地方，当你试图推测九个月后它会是什么样子，两年后它又会是什么样子的时候。不过作为一次智力实验，我想我第一次用的电脑是 Commodore 64。

Me too. Cool.

我也是。酷。

It had one megahertz CPU and 64K of memory. Everyone who wrote software for that machine internalized certain constraints. Well, all the constraints. That machine was nothing but constraints. If you put that programmer in a time machine and teleported him or her to 2026 and gave them a modern computer today and said, “Now write me a piece of software,” they’d be lost for a little bit because all their techniques and all their heuristics would simply be wrong. Or not wrong, because efficient software is still beautiful. They would be out of date with the value that they could create. The amount of optimization you have to apply for a one megahertz computer to produce a video game is just very different from what you have to apply today.

它有一个一兆赫的 CPU 和 64K 的内存。为那台机器编写软件的每个人都内化了某些限制。嗯，所有的限制。那台机器除了限制，什么都没有。如果你把那个程序员放进时间机器，把他或她传送到 2026 年，给他们一台现代计算机，并说：“现在给我写一段软件，”他们会有一点迷茫，因为他们的所有技术和启发式方法都根本不适用。或者说也不算完全不适用，因为高效的软件依然是美丽的。他们创造价值的方式已经过时了。为了让一台一兆赫的计算机运行一个视频游戏，所需要的优化量与今天相比完全不同。

Just imagine that guy that was programming back then on a Commodore. Just remember, remember all those, like what programming felt like and what it meant, highly constrained resources- … how slow everything is.

想象一下那个人，当时在康柏德电脑上编程。只要记住，记住所有这些，比如编程的感觉是什么，它的意义是什么，高度受限的资源——……一切都是多么慢。

Beautiful in many ways. Beautiful.

在很多方面都很美。美丽。

It’s chiseling. But-

正在雕刻。但是—

It-

它-

… imagine that person coming now.

……想象那个人现在走过来。

It’s romantic too, though. Let’s also imagine that. This is one of the things, whenever we bemoan modern car culture, for example, right? And then we think like, “Oh, wasn’t it better when we all had the horse-drawn carriages and so on?” No, it wasn’t. Do you know what New York smelled like when we used horses for transportation? It was an open sewer. They just shat everywhere.

不过这也很浪漫。我们也来想象一下。这就是其中一件事，每当我们抱怨现代汽车文化时，例如，对吧？然后我们会想，“哦，当我们都有马车之类的时候不是更好吗？”不，并不是。你知道当我们用马作为交通工具时，纽约是什么味道吗？简直就是一个开放的下水道。它们到处拉屎。

Yeah, but have you played Red Dead Redemption? You know how cool those cowboys were-

是啊，但你玩过《荒野大镖客：救赎》吗？你知道那些牛仔有多酷——

That is the way-

那就是方式

… on the horse?

……在马背上吗？

… to experience the nostalgic past, when you don’t get all the furry impulses and senses.

……去体验怀旧的过去，那时你不会有所有毛茸茸的冲动和感官。

So basically programming, old school programming by hand is kinda like the cowboy culture that we romanticize and make movies about.

所以基本上，编程，手工编程，就像是我们浪漫化、拍成电影的牛仔文化。

It’s already happening, the romanticization of handwritten code. And I have some of it because it was a very romantic era. I’m grateful to have been alive for 20 years of economically valuable handwritten code. That was a, that was a good time.

这已经在发生了，手写代码的浪漫化。而我也有一些，因为那是一个非常浪漫的时代。我很感激自己曾经经历了 20 年经济上有价值的手写代码。那是一个，那是美好的时光。

Where handwritten beautiful code was also valuable.

手写的漂亮代码也很有价值的地方。

Correct. Because handwritten beautiful code exists as much today as it did yesterday. There are people who willfully write new video games for the Commodore 64, or for the Sega Mega Drive, or for other vintage consoles. In fact, one of my favorite video games of late is ModRetro’s. Do you know Palmer Luckey’s- … side geschäft, which is recreating old consoles. So he’s recreated the Game Boy.

正确。因为手写的优美代码今天依然存在，就像昨天一样。有人会自愿为 Commodore 64、Sega Mega Drive 或其他复古游戏机编写新游戏。事实上，我最近最喜欢的电子游戏之一是 ModRetro 的。你知道 Palmer Luckey 的……副业，就是重建老式游戏机。所以他重建了 Game Boy。

Nice.

很好。

It’s amazing. Look it up. It’s really cool. But what’s even cooler than the fact that he recreated this hardware and the original chunkiness, but brought it up to date with sort of modern screens and so on, now they just put out the Nintendo 64 too. Incredible. Super cool. Wild attention to detail, input lag, and all the other things. But what’s also very cool, that one, I have to wave. That one right there, and hover over it, ’cause then you get to see what I’m talking about. That is the Chromatic-

太棒了。查一下吧。真的很酷。但比他重新制作这款硬件和原来的厚重感还要酷的是，他还把它更新到了现代屏幕等，现在他们甚至还发布了任天堂 64。令人难以置信。超级酷。对细节的极致关注，包括输入延迟以及其他各种方面。但同样非常酷的是，那一个，我得挥一挥。就在那儿，把鼠标悬停上去，因为那样你就能看到我在说什么。那就是 Chromatic-

Ah

啊

… Tetris re-implementation.

… 俄罗斯方块重新实现。

Wow.

哇。

I played a lot of Tetris on the original Game Boy. Probably one of my top three favorite games of all time. And they rewrote it with one change. If you hit up, the brick slams. And that speeds up the game by about 400%. It is an incredible game, and it’s a new Game Boy game. I think the Game Boy came out in ’89 or ’88. It’s a very old machine. The fact that there’s still people writing new old games is awesome, and the reason they do it in part, now here they’re doing it because they want Tetris, but there are people who do it just for the love of the constraints, for the love of the romantic notion of writing that. Just like there are people still riding around on horses, not to get places fast, but because they like the mode of transportation where it’s a literal biological being below you propelling you forward.

我在原版游戏掌上电脑上玩了很多俄罗斯方块。可能是我有史以来最喜欢的三款游戏之一。他们重写了游戏，但只做了一个改变。如果你按上，方块会猛力下落。这使游戏的速度提高了大约 400%。这是一款令人难以置信的游戏，而且它是一款新的游戏掌上电脑游戏。 我觉得 Game Boy 是在‘89 或者 ‘88 年发布的。这是一台非常老的机器。至今仍有人在创作新的老游戏，这非常棒，而他们这么做的部分原因，现在他们这么做是因为他们想玩俄罗斯方块，但也有人仅仅是因为喜欢这些限制，喜欢编写这些游戏的浪漫概念而去做这件事。就像仍有人骑马，不是为了快速到达目的地，而是因为他们喜欢这种交通方式——一个真实的生物在你脚下推动你前进。

And also, we should say that that beautiful code is great training data. So in some sense, the beauty that we’ve built over a few decades-

而且，我们还应该说，那些美丽的代码是很好的训练数据。所以在某种意义上，我们在过去几十年里建立的美感——

Yes

是

… continues.

……继续。

We gave birth to this moment. What a privilege, and I feel that very personally because I… Almost all of the code I’ve ever written is public code. The vast majority of my career has been dedicated to writing open source code, and therefore, some of that code, some of those beautiful lines are in the training set. And in fact, I’ve heard people do this when they write Ruby code. They ask the agent, “Write it like DHH would.” And they’re pleased with the result, and that does warm my heart a little bit, that I helped give birth to this moment in my tiny little small part. And anyone else who contributed open source code or any code at all that the agents have had access to over the last, well, entire time programming has been around as a discipline, is now part of these new agent overlords.

我们创造了这一刻。这是多么大的荣幸，我对此感受非常深，因为我……我写过的几乎所有代码都是公开代码。我职业生涯的大部分时间都致力于编写开源代码，因此，其中一些代码，一些美丽的代码行，出现在了训练集中。事实上，我听说有人在写 Ruby 代码时会这样做：他们会问智能体，“像 DHH 那样写。”他们对结果感到满意，这确实让我有点感动，因为我在自己微小的一部分中帮助创造了这一刻。任何其他贡献过开源代码或任何智能体在过去，嗯，自编程作为一门学科存在以来就有机会访问的代码的人，现在都是这些新的智能体统治者的一部分。

So you don’t have a little bit of sadness that writing beautiful code by hand is now less and less useful?

所以你一点都不感到难过吗，现在手写漂亮代码变得越来越没用了？

Am I sad that if I had to get a job tomorrow, it’s unlikely that I could apply my skills in such a way that I would be paid to write these manual lines of code? No. I did it for 25 years. Like, I wanna see something new here, especially if we’re all gonna live forever, which I hope we don’t. Maybe we’ll get to that. But, like, I’ve done that. That’s enough. That’s fine. I don’t feel any more nostalgic about that than I do about the fact that I don’t have to spend my time in the field with a hoe or at the assembly line.

如果明天我必须找一份工作，我会难过吗？因为我不太可能能够以使用我的技能的方式去写这些手工代码而获得报酬？不会。我已经做了 25 年了。就像，我想看看一些新的东西，特别是如果我们都要永远活下去的话，但我希望我们不要。也许我们会谈到那个。但，我已经做过了。那就够了。没关系。我对那段经历没有比对我不用在田里拿锄头或在装配线上工作的事实怀念更多。

Well, hold on a second. You are one of the best programmers in the world at writing handcrafted beautiful code, appreciators of beauty with great taste.

等等。你是世界上最优秀的程序员之一，擅长编写手工打造的精美代码，是具有卓越品味的美的欣赏者。

Correct.

正确。

That has been replaced.

那已经被替换了。

I say humbly.

我谦逊地说。

Yeah. That has been replaced. Like, you have now… You’re just fast evolving, and you’re able to… One of your really great qualities is you’re able to change your mind and evolve very quickly. But, like, you had to kill that other person.

是的。那个已经被取代了。比如，你现在……你只是快速进化，你能够……你的一个非常优秀的品质是你能够迅速改变主意并进化。但，就像，你必须杀了那个另一个人。

I am grateful for every moment that brought me to where I am right now, and therefore, I have also tried, and maybe this did take some practice. I will concede that. Maybe I wasn’t always like this, but stoic philosophy, amor fati, loving your fate, is an incredibly liberating way to live. And you could attack that and say, “Well, that’s a point of privilege.” True, but also I had the same directional point when I didn’t have all this, quote unquote, “privilege.” So I think there’s a way to live and interact with the world where you accept the things you can change and the things you cannot change and fall in love with all of it. Fall in love with the fact that the world today has jumped two decades forward into technology industry from where it was last year.

我感激每一个把我带到现在这个位置的时刻，因此，我也尝试过，也许这确实需要一些练习。我会承认这一点。也许我并不一直都是这样，但斯多葛哲学，amor fati，热爱你的命运，是一种令人难以置信的解放的生活方式。你可能会攻击这一点说，‘好吧，这是特权的体现。’确实如此，但当我没有所有这些所谓的‘特权’时，我也持有同样的方向性观点。所以我认为，有一种生活和与世界互动的方式，你既接受你能改变的事物，也接受你无法改变的事物，并爱上这一切。爱上世界如今在科技产业上比去年前进了二十年的这个事实。

So can we talk about the general anxiety that programmers feel going through the same transformation? They’ve maybe gone to university, majored in computer science, dreamed of being programmers and building stuff, high salary, and now everything’s changing, and there’s deep anxiety about, “What do I do when… with my life?” Can you empathize with that, and what the hell are they supposed to do?

那么我们可以谈谈程序员在经历同样转变时感受到的一般性焦虑吗？他们可能上过大学，主修计算机科学，梦想成为程序员并开发东西，拿高薪，而现在一切都在变化，他们对“当……我的人生怎么办？”感到深深的焦虑。你能理解这种感受吗？他们到底应该怎么办？

Hugely. Because just because I have this disposition, I’m keenly aware that that’s not evenly distributed, that not everyone sits with this position and this optimism for the future. But I do think I wanna separate things a little bit. I think you’re gonna have a hard time coping with the new reality if the only thing you loved about programming was the mechanical bits of putting the right logical constructs together to produce something other people told you to produce. Because that mechanical process is under threat. If you are, as you just mentioned, excited about building things, I don’t think you’re under threat at all. In fact, I think there’s a great argument for us needing far more builders than what we have now, and if you look at the employment stats, it’s fuzzy. It’s not clear what’s gonna happen at all. Some stats actually show an increase in openings because the advent of AI is so dramatically lowering the price of programs that people want a lot more programs. This is the classic, the Jevons paradox, that says when the price of something goes down, there’s gonna be more demand for it. And this is the example of the ATMs too. When the ATM originally came, a lot of bank tellers were very afraid for their job because suddenly there was a machine that could dispense money from people’s account. Well, what the ATMs did was lower the price of a branch, and suddenly banks could afford to open a lot more branches, and we ended up with more bank tellers than we did before. Now, none of this is guaranteed. There are also moments where things do change. The vast majority of people worked in the fields up until the late 1800s, and then suddenly we got mechanized harvesting tools, and we did not need human labor with a hoe and an ox out there. We had mechanical tools to do that for us. In that moment, are there people who were threatened that their job and their livelihood was at stake? Yes. Was that a reasonable thing to feel threatened about? Yes. The Luddites smashing the weaving machines- … in England had the same thing. And I think maybe that’s the better parallel than people working the fields, because these were actually highly skilled professionals doing a job that they liked on rather favorable conditions, not slaving outside in the sun all day. But where we live now, would we still like for clothing to be this heavily constrained resource? Like, what if this T-shirt was $400? I mean, okay, then I’d have two. Well, my wardrobe probably looks like I have two. But I think the general progress of mankind depends on productivity improvements. And what are productivity improvements? This is very important, because in the abstract, I think everyone says, “Yay, productivity. That’s good.” What did you think, this was all just vibes? No. Productivity means fewer people to do the same number or the same job. Now, the amount of job you want done may increase, and therefore you get more people, but it also may not. There may be pockets where a company just needs a certain set of fixed tasks done, and suddenly they can do them with a 10th the number of people. This, by the way, could… is tragic and difficult in the moment for the individual being laid off. It’s also amazing for the economy at large. Suddenly you’ve freed up these resources who can now go do more productive things. This is how the whole economy evolves and improves, and how we get growth, and growth is good. I think this is the other thing to make a strong defense for, that growth in general is a good thing. We do not want to wind the clock back to 1920 or 1950. We should be excited about the fact that we’ve discovered new technology that allows us to do vastly more. And while some of the tasks that may be taken over by AI were tasks that humans were excited to do, and they’re just no longer economically viable, a lot of the tasks were just drudgery. This is certainly true of my programming. There were moments of programming I thought were amazing. These were the moments that produced that state of flow we talked about last time, and they were ecstatic. How often did they happen out of the course of a year? If you took your average programmer, how much time out of 2,000 hours at the job did that person spend in a flow state? 100? 200? 25? I think all those answers could be plausible for someone. And taking that drudgery, handing it over to machines, that is the history of civilization.

非常多。因为尽管我有这种性格倾向，我清楚地意识到，这种性格并不是均匀分布的，并不是每个人都持有这种观点和对未来的乐观态度。但我确实想稍微把事情分开。我认为，如果你唯一喜欢编程的部分是把正确的逻辑结构组合起来以生成他人告诉你要做的东西，那么你会很难应对新的现实。因为这种机械性的过程正在受到威胁。如果你像刚才提到的那样，对构建东西感到兴奋，我认为你根本没有受到威胁。事实上，我认为有一个很好的理由表明，我们需要的建设者远比现在多，如果你看看就业数据，这点是模糊的。 目前完全不清楚会发生什么。一些统计数据实际上显示，由于人工智能的出现大幅降低了程序的价格，人们想要的程序数量大幅增加，因此职位空缺也有所增加。这就是经典的杰文斯悖论，它表示当某样东西的价格下降时，对它的需求会增加。这也是 ATM 机的一个例子。当 ATM 机最初出现时，很多银行出纳对自己的工作感到非常担忧，因为突然出现了一台可以从人们的账户中提取现金的机器。其实，ATM 机降低了开设分行的成本，银行突然能够开设更多的分行，我们最终拥有的银行出纳比以前更多。当然，这一切都没有保证，也存在事情确实发生变化的情况。 直到 19 世纪末，绝大多数人都在田地里工作，然后突然我们有了机械化的收割工具，不再需要人力拿着锄头和牛在田里劳作。我们有机械工具可以为我们完成这些工作。在那一刻，有人担心他们的工作和生计受到威胁吗？有。这种感到威胁是合理的吗？是的。拉德分子砸毁织布机—— ……在英格兰也有同样的事情。我觉得这可能比人们在田里工作的比喻更合适，因为这些人实际上是高度熟练的专业人士，在相当有利的条件下做着自己喜欢的工作，而不是整天在太阳下辛苦劳作。但是在我们现在居住的地方，我们还会希望衣物成为如此受限的资源吗？比如，如果这件 T 恤要 400 美元呢？我的意思是，好吧，那我可能会有两件。嗯，我的衣橱看起来大概也像是只有两件吧。但我认为人类的一般进步依赖于生产力的提升。生产力提升是什么？这非常重要，因为抽象地说，我认为每个人都会说：“耶，生产力。那很好。”你以为这一切只是随便来的吗？当然不是。 生产力意味着用更少的人做同样的工作或同样数量的工作。当然，你希望完成的工作数量可能会增加，因此你会雇佣更多的人，但也可能不会。有些地方，公司可能只需要完成某些固定任务，而突然之间他们可以用十分之一的人力完成这些任务。顺便说一下，这对被裁员的个人来说是悲惨的、困难的。不过，对整个经济来说，这也是令人惊叹的。你突然释放了这些资源，他们现在可以去做更有生产力的事情。这就是整个经济如何演变和改善，以及我们如何实现增长，而增长是好的。我认为，这也是需要强有力地辩护的一点，即总体来说，增长是一件好事。 我们不想把时钟倒回到 1920 年或 1950 年。我们应该为发现了能让我们做更多事情的新技术而感到兴奋。虽然有些可能被 AI 取代的任务曾经是人类很乐意去做的，但现在它们在经济上已经不再可行，很多任务只是单调乏味的劳动。这在我的编程工作中尤其如此。我编程时确实有过些让我觉得非常棒的时刻。这些时刻产生了上次我们谈到的那种“心流”状态，非常令人兴奋。那么这些时刻在一年中发生的频率有多高呢？如果拿一个普通的程序员来说，这个人在两千小时的工作中，有多少时间处于心流状态呢？ 100？200？25？我认为这些答案对某些人来说都可能是合理的。而将那种繁重的工作交给机器处理，这就是文明的历史。

Yeah, I mean, the hours spent debugging. So programming has so many painful, painful hours in it. And now they’re gone. For the… I mean, for the most part, it’s just fun.

是的，我的意思是，用在调试上的时间。所以编程里有很多痛苦、痛苦的时间。而现在它们都消失了。对于……我的意思是，大多数情况下，现在只是很有趣。

A lot of it is gone in a lot of domains, and the rest of it may be gone very soon. So that’s where some of the romanticism also comes in- … because pain in the moment is difficult. It’s hard. It’s annoying. Pain in the rearview mirror is accomplishment, proud, learning, steps forward, all the things, right? So we encompass all of this as part of the human experience, that we hate pain in the moment, but we cherish it when it’s five minutes past and we don’t remember the hardship. We just remember the progress.

在许多领域中，它已经消失了很多，其余的可能很快也会消失。这就是一些浪漫主义的来源……因为当下的痛苦是困难的。它很难受，很烦人。当回望过去的痛苦时，它变成了成就感、自豪感、学习、进步，所有这些，对吧？所以我们把这一切都视为人类经历的一部分，我们讨厌当下的痛苦，但当痛苦过了五分钟，我们不记得当时的艰辛，却只记得进步，我们会珍惜它。

So certainly at the societal level, at the macroeconomic level, growth is exciting. But at the individual level, there’s going to be a lot of anxiety, potentially a lot of suffering. So by way of advice, if you’re like a young DHH or young developer programmer now, what would you, what would you advise they do?

所以当然在社会层面上，在宏观经济层面上，增长是令人兴奋的。但在个人层面上，会有很多焦虑，可能还有很多痛苦。因此作为建议，如果你现在是一个年轻的 DHH 或者年轻的开发程序员，你会建议他们做什么？

Don’t try to anticipate anything. You will literally go crazy. Because even the smartest brains in the business cannot anticipate what two model hops from here is going to look like. It’s an absolute waste of time, and you will develop an AI psychosis trying to deduce what two years from now is gonna look like. Focus on right now, and right now is the most incredible time to be into computers. You can make them do the most amazing things if you lean in. If you maybe for a hot moment force yourself to learn where the state of the art is, I double dog dare you not to get excited about what’s possible.

不要试图预测任何事情。你真的会疯掉。因为即使是业界最聪明的大脑也无法预测两代模型之后会是什么样子。这完全是在浪费时间，而且你会在试图推测两年后的情况时患上人工智能心理病。专注于现在，而现在是涉足计算机领域的最不可思议的时刻。如果你投入其中，你可以让计算机做出最惊人的事情。如果你哪怕抽出短暂的时间强迫自己去了解技术的最新进展，我敢打赌你不会对可能实现的事情感到兴奋。

And would you recommend building publicly?

你会建议公开构建吗？

I think it’s optional actually to build publicly. I think it’s, it’s nice to do because then you get to be part of a community, and there’s some camaraderie in open source. Not some camaraderie. There’s an enormous amount of camaraderie. Open source is an incredible source of community and camaraderie, and it’s also a great way to stem some of that personal existential dread. If you’re amongst other humans, you can get infected with good forms of mind viruses, exciting forms of mind viruses, the ones that tell you that it’s all gonna be okay, and the future looks bright, and if we build a bunch of things together, we can do things none of us ever dreamed we could do. I was just talking to Ryan Hughes, who’s been my main partner on Omarchy almost since day one, and we were literally talking about yesterday how when we started on this journey together, our ambitions were very modest. We’re just like, “Can we get this distro to not crash at 3:00 AM because of an Arch package that just got pushed out outside of our control? That would be amazing. Then it’d be great.” Now we’re leaning back and thinking, “How can we take over the world? How can we make Omarchy go to Mars? How can we do everything we’ve ever dreamed of?” And that level of ambition inflation is partly because things have gotten better with agents, but hugely also because we’ve surrounded ourselves with others excited about the same journey. And if you’re just sitting in your little isolated cave worrying about the future, yeah, you’re gonna go a little nuts. I think if we learned anything during COVID, it’s that people will go nuts sitting in their little cave inside by themselves worrying about what’s gonna happen. That is indistinguishable from depression, ruminating endlessly about things you can’t control. I’m sorry to channel some Jensen Huang here, but that’s just loser talk. You don’t have to be a loser. You can choose to lean in and- … win. And win is very broadly defined as learning more, making more, contributing more, being part of more. And at the end of the day, what are your choices? You don’t have a choice, mate. The future’s coming whether you like it or not, so you might as well choose to be excited about it.

我认为公开构建实际上是可选的。我觉得这样做很好，因为你可以成为社区的一部分，而且在开源中有一定的友情。不只是一定的友情，而是大量的友情。开源是社区和友情的一个令人难以置信的来源，它也是缓解个人存在性焦虑的一个好方法。如果你在其他人中间，你可以被一些好的思想病毒感染，那些令人兴奋的思想病毒，它们会告诉你一切都会好起来，未来一片光明，如果我们一起构建很多东西，我们可以做一些我们之前从未梦想过的事情。 我刚刚和 Ryan Hughes 谈过，他几乎从一开始就是我在 Omarchy 上的主要合作伙伴，我们实际上昨天还在谈论，当我们一起开始这段旅程时，我们的目标非常谦虚。我们只是想，“我们能不能让这个发行版不会在凌晨三点因为一个无法控制的 Arch 软件包崩溃？那就太棒了。然后一切就会很好。”现在我们开始稍微放开思考，“我们如何才能征服世界？我们如何让 Omarchy 上火星？我们如何实现我们曾经梦想的一切？”这种野心的膨胀部分是因为代理功能变得更好了，但很大程度上也是因为我们周围聚集了同样对这段旅程充满热情的人。 如果你只是坐在你那小小的孤立洞穴里担心未来，是的，你会有点疯狂。我认为我们在 COVID 期间学到的任何东西就是，人们会在独自一人的小洞穴里坐着，担心将会发生的事情，从而变得疯狂。这和抑郁是无法区分的，一直反复思考那些你无法控制的事情。抱歉，有点像在模仿 Jensen Huang，但这只是失败者的说法。你不必成为失败者。你可以选择积极投入——……并获胜。而‘获胜’的定义非常广泛，包括学到更多、赚得更多、贡献更多、参与更多。最终，到底你的选择是什么？伙计，你没有选择。无论你是否喜欢，未来都会到来，所以你不妨选择为它感到兴奋。

But I mean, we should emphasize the fact that planning is nearly impossible with AI. I mean, most of us plan our life a little bit. When we’re younger, you have, like, hopes and dreams. There’s a reason you go to college. There’s a plan underlying that.

但我的意思是，我们应该强调这样一个事实：有了人工智能，计划几乎是不可能的。我是说，我们大多数人都会稍微计划一下自己的生活。当我们年轻时，你会有希望和梦想。你上大学是有原因的。这背后有一个计划。

I agree with that.

我同意那点。

But there-

但是那里—

I’ll concede that.

我承认这一点。

… it is kinda-

… 这有点-

This is different.

这是不同的。

… nuts that it’s impossible to really plan. Because, like, you really don’t know if there will even be a Claude Code, a Codex, and Cursor six months from now. Maybe it’ll be you’ll be talking to WhatsApp. Maybe it’ll be all open call type. Maybe it’ll just all be voice. Maybe Omarchy will take over the world and it’ll be voice. Maybe there won’t be operating systems anymore. You’ll just… There’ll be this glowing orb that just you just talk to because if natural language is enough to accomplish all tasks in life, like, what is life about? Like, what are the major tasks you need to accomplish in life? If you can just do that with voice, and it writes all the programs for you, and all is systematized, and what are the jobs needed then? Maybe it’s more about the service industry. Maybe there won’t be programmers, like agentic engineers at all. And so yes, your advice is wise to focus on the moment, but that doesn’t mean that it’s just a crazy rollercoaster ride, ’cause we don’t know what this December or what this January will look like.

……疯狂到根本无法真正规划。因为，你真的不知道六个月后是否还会有 Claude Code、Codex 和 Cursor。也许你会在和 WhatsApp 交流。也许一切都会是开放调用类型。也许一切都会只是语音。也许 Omarchy 会统治世界，那也会是语音。也许再也不会有操作系统了。你只需要……会有一个发光的球体，你只需与之交谈，因为如果自然语言足够完成生活中的所有任务，那么生活究竟是为了什么？比如，你需要完成的生活中主要任务是什么？如果你只需要用语音就能完成，并且它为你写好所有程序，一切都系统化，那么还需要什么工作呢？也许更多的是关于服务行业。 也许根本不会有程序员，像有自主性的工程师也不会有。所以，是的，你的建议专注于当下是明智的，但这并不意味着这只是一次疯狂的过山车之旅，因为我们不知道这个十二月或一月会是什么样子。

We don’t know, and therefore, we should choose to have faith that it’s gonna pan out. That is my best advice towards fighting anxiety, is that you have a choice, to a large degree, of how to lean. Do you wanna lean into PDoom? PDoom is gonna happen whether you lean into it or not. You don’t have control.

我们不知道，因此，我们应该选择相信事情会顺利发展。这是我对抗焦虑的最好建议，那就是你在很大程度上可以选择自己的倾向。你想倾向于灾难感吗？无论你是否倾向于它，灾难都会发生。你无法掌控。

But there’s also actual daily schedule of how much learning are you doing, how much building are you doing, how much diversification you’re doing. And for example, I traveled across rural China recently, and I did it quite deliberately because you’re talking to people in China, in rural anywhere, where time moves much slower, where there’s no discussions about agentic engineering. And the ti- and I started by going on the Great Wall of China. That’s timeless. That spans centuries. And, you know, there was, like, this kind of tension of FOMO, like maybe I’m missing out on something. But then I very deliberately wanted to find the timelessness of human existence, really plug into the fact that, okay, it always feels like everything’s changing throughout human history, but, you know, the universals are still true of what matters in life. And I just wanted to make sure to keep connected to that.

但是也有真正的每日计划，包括你学习了多少、建造了多少、进行了多少多样化。例如，我最近在中国农村旅行，我这样做是相当有意的，因为你会与中国的人们交谈，在任何农村地区，时间流动得更慢，没有关于主动工程的讨论。我开始是去了中国长城。那是永恒的，跨越几个世纪。你知道，会有一种错失恐惧的紧张感，像是也许我错过了什么。 但随后我非常有意地想要寻找人类存在的永恒性，真正地感受到这样一个事实：好吧，纵观人类历史，一切似乎总在变化，但你知道，那些关于生活中重要事物的普遍真理依然成立。我只是想确保自己始终与此保持联系。

You’re not gonna miss anything. This is the part that actually grinded my gears in the early phases of this transition. Everyone was so up in arms that if you didn’t… It’s loops now. Oh, no, no, we’re done with loops. It’s graphs now. Oh, no, no, we’re done with that. It’s harnesses this, right? They’re constantly churning through the frontier, which in one way is actually very exciting. This is what happens when a new field opens up. It’s like a new portal, and it’s all spilling out. That’s exciting. But it also means that if I had just been backpacking for the last year, hadn’t touched a computer, hadn’t witnessed this agentic moment, and I just showed up yesterday, do you know what? I would’ve been caught up in two weeks. There’s not any accumulation, which is in some ways a great relief. If you missed the past year, you can catch up to the frontier in two weeks. If you’re a programmer who was out hiking the Himalayas for a year and you come back, you can catch up in two weeks. And this is actually the great credit to the progress we’re experiencing. We have so many experiments running simultaneously right now that are constantly and ruthlessly sorting what works, what doesn’t work. You don’t have to remember or even be part of that entire journey. You can just show up for the results.

你不会错过任何东西的。这实际上是在这次过渡的早期阶段让我特别恼火的部分。每个人都激动不已，如果你没有……现在是循环。哦，不，不，我们已经不玩循环了。现在是图。哦，不，不，我们已经不玩图了。现在是这些工具，对吧？他们不断地在前沿领域中探索，从某种意义上来说，这其实非常令人兴奋。这就是一个新领域开放时的情况。就像一个新门户，所有东西都在涌现。这很令人兴奋。但这也意味着，如果我过去一年一直在背包旅行，没有碰过电脑，没有见证这个有主动性的时刻，而我昨天才出现，你知道吗？我会在两周内赶上进度的。 没有任何累积，这在某种程度上是一种很大的解脱。如果你错过了过去的一年，你可以在两周内赶上前沿。如果你是一个程序员，出去喜马拉雅徒步了一年，然后回来，你也可以在两周内赶上。而这实际上是我们所经历进步的巨大功劳。我们现在有这么多实验同时进行，它们不断且无情地筛选什么有效，什么无效。你不必记住甚至参与整个过程。你只需展示结果就行。

But the key step there, when you come back from the backpacking journey, is to be willing to become a totally new, different human because things are changing so fast.

但关键的一步是，当你从背包旅行回来时，要愿意成为一个全新、不同的人，因为事情变化得太快。

That’s right.

没错。

I mean, literally, if you left for the backpacking journey- … in October last year and came back in April or May-

我的意思是，字面上，如果你去年十月出发去背包旅行……然后在四月或五月回来——

You might as well have been in the cryo chamber for 100 years.

你倒不如已经在冷冻舱里待了 100 年。

… it’s like, “What, what do you mean? We’re not programming anymore?” This, it’s a very… it’s a huge transformation.

……就像是，“什么，你什么意思？我们不再编程了吗？”这是非常……这是一个巨大的转变。

It’s startling, and I actually… I mean, I’m putting some of this on slightly for effect. I also recognize that it’s okay to grief for a hot moment. That’s not my disposition. It’s not how I do it, but I accept that that’s a time-tested mechanism for coping with a sense of loss. And it’s okay to have a sense of loss that the world that you knew and maybe you were very fond of is no longer the same.

这令人吃惊，实际上我……我是说，我在某种程度上是为了效果而做出这样的表现。我也意识到，为短暂的失落而悲伤是可以的。这不是我的性格，也不是我的处理方式，但我接受这是应对失落感的一种经久不衰的机制。并且，感到你曾经熟悉并且可能非常喜爱的世界已经不再一样，是可以理解的。

I maybe should say out loud and explicitly that I do have that, the Native American with a tear rolling down my… Like, there’s a sadness. It’s a goodbye. It’s a goodbye to the old world of programming.

我也许应该大声明确地说，我确实有那种感觉，那个眼角滑落泪水的美洲原住民……就像，有一种悲伤。这是一种告别。这是对旧的编程世界的告别。

That’s… it’s so fascinating to me.

那……对我来说真是太迷人了。

I’ve spent so many years-

我已经花了这么多年——

But it all amounted to this moment. That is, to me, what makes the entire journey so meaningful. AI did not arrive from the sky. It was not alien technology that had blasted through the universe and suddenly showed up on our shores. AI has been around for as long as computer science has been around. In the ’50s, they thought the problem was gonna be cracked in about a decade, the smartest people at the time. It took a little longer, but the reason it took a little longer was in part because we took some blind turns on the road to AI and neural networks and thought that there were other symbolic representations that were gonna carry the day, and they didn’t. And that probably set us back about 15 years. So some of it was also we had to go through the gaming revolution, 3D games. If we had not had Quake, if we had not had Duke Nukem, if we had not had Unreal Tournament, we’d never have gotten AI because we would never have gotten the GPUs, and therefore we would never have been able to get AI in the shape it is now. So everything we did up until this moment was required to get there. You were part of that. Holy… What a blessing. What a blessing to have contributed in your small part, either by training or by playing video games. Literally, you could just choose to think of it that way. All those times you spent in, for my case, in the ’90s just playing video games, they were-

但这一切最终都汇聚到这一刻。对我来说，这就是让整个旅程如此有意义的原因。人工智能并不是从天而降的。它不是穿越宇宙突然出现在我们岸边的外星技术。人工智能自计算机科学诞生以来就一直存在。在五十年代，当时最聪明的人认为这个问题大约在十年内就能解决。实际上花的时间更长一些，但延长的原因部分是因为我们在通往人工智能和神经网络的道路上走了一些弯路，并认为还有其他符号表示方式能够取得成功，但事实并非如此。这可能让我们落后了大约十五年。所以其中的一部分原因还在于我们必须经历游戏革命，三维游戏的兴起。 如果没有《雷神之锤》，如果没有《毁灭公爵》，如果没有《虚幻锦标赛》，我们就永远不会得到人工智能，因为我们永远不会得到 GPU，因此我们也就永远无法以现在的形式获得人工智能。所以直到这一刻，我们所做的一切都是为了到达这里。你也是其中的一部分。天哪……多么大的福气。能以自己的小小方式做出贡献，无论是通过训练还是玩电子游戏，都是一种福气。你完全可以选择这样去看待它。所有那些在 90 年代光玩电子游戏度过的时光，对我而言，它们都是——

You were contributing.

你正在做出贡献。

Yeah, I was contributing to the AI revolution right there and then moment.

是的，我就在那一刻为人工智能革命做出了贡献。

To the progress of human civilization. No, for sure. Civilization progresses with the death of the old and the birth of the new, and it continues in this way, but it’s still the grieving process is a part of it, I think.

对人类文明的进步。不，肯定不是。文明随着旧事物的消亡和新事物的诞生而进步，并且以这种方式持续，但我认为，哀悼的过程仍然是其中的一部分。

Take a moment. It’s okay. Take a… And also, you don’t even have to accept that it’s all dead. Like, if you are still very attached to the hand chiseling, which if you’d asked me a year ago, I would have predicted that I would’ve been more attached. I’m surprised-

花点时间。没关系。花…而且，你甚至不必接受一切都已经消失了。就像，如果你仍然非常依恋手工凿刻，如果你一年前问我，我会预测我会更依恋。我很惊讶——

I’m kinda surprised…

我有点惊讶…

… a little that I’ve not been more attached. But the reason I’ve not been more attached, I think, is that I found something more fun. And if it hadn’t been like that, if AI had just replaced the thing I loved and gave me something I hated, I’d probably be a little bitter.

……我有一点没能更加投入。但我之所以没能更加投入，我想，是因为我找到了更有趣的东西。如果不是这样，如果人工智能只是取代了我所热爱的事物，却给了我自己讨厌的东西，我可能会有一点怨恨。

I mean, this really feels… It’s– it’s hilarious and awesome to watch and inspiring to watch. It’s like Picasso all of a sudden f– like, getting access to image generation and getting super excited and switching in a matter of months. That’s literally what happened. So, like, it’s an artist that appreciated beautiful code, and all of a sudden you’re talking about having fun-

我的意思是，这真的让人觉得……它——观看起来既搞笑又棒，而且令人振奋。这就像毕加索突然……比如，获得了图像生成的能力，然后非常兴奋，在几个月内发生了巨大的变化。这字面上就是发生的事情。所以，就像，一个欣赏美丽代码的艺术家，突然你在谈论如何玩得开心——

I think Picasso is actually a good parallel because if you look at his early work where he learned his craft, it was painting realistic paintings, right? Like, he was training to be a master of the old ways of depicting reality the best way we knew how, and then along comes all these other forms of expression. Cubism comes along. And all these o– forms of abstract expression, he’s not decrying that he’s not doing Renaissance paintings anymore, that he’s not just painting the perfect depiction of an apple. He’s reimagining the apple to be a freaking square, and he’s getting excited about that. And I feel that transition, that we’ve gone from this one mode of expression, and we’ve suddenly opened the gates where the, like, the color spectrum is so much wider. I’m seeing more. And it’s perhaps because the way I became a c– programmer. I did not become a programmer because of a deep love of if statements. I became a programmer because I wanted programs. I wanted things to exist that did not exist. And at first, I had to learn how to program to make that happen. Then I happened to fall in love with programming as a craft, and then I spent two decades really diving deep on that. But now I’m back. I’m back to having an idea and being impatient beyond belief to see it exist in the world, and AI has just shrunk that down to almost nothing. So it’s an acceleration of a rediscovery. Now, I understand that that’s not true for everyone. There are plenty of programmers who just loved programming right from the beginning, and they were attracted to the logical constructs and so forth. I mean, I’ve been there for two decades, so I get it. But I also think that you’re able to discover new sides of yourself- … if you let it in. Again, I keep coming back to this almost regret minimization framework, to borrow Jeff Bezos’s terms here. Are you gonna look at yourself two years from now and think, “Oh, I spent my time well being pissy about the present, about the fact that my industry changed”? Or would I two years from now look back upon this moment and be proud of myself for leaning in, for maybe having a moment of grief? Again, there’s room for all of it. And then going, “I’m gonna learn how the world spins now, and I’m gonna make not just the best of it, I’m gonna make more of it.”

我认为毕加索实际上是一个很好的类比，因为如果你看看他早期的作品，那时候他学习自己的技艺，就是画写实画，对吧？比如说，他正在训练成为用我们所知最好的方式描绘现实的旧方法的大师，然后各种其他表达形式出现了。立体主义随之出现。 而所有这些抽象表达的形式，他并不是在批评自己不再画文艺复兴时期的画作，也不是说他不只是画苹果的完美写实。他在重新想象苹果，把它变成一个该死的正方形，而他对此感到兴奋。我能感受到这种转变，我们已经从这一种表达方式走过来了，然后突然开启了大门，颜色的范围宽了很多。我看到了更多。这也许是因为我成为程序员的方式。我成为程序员并不是因为对 if 语句有深厚的热爱。我成为程序员是因为我想要程序。我想要那些不存在的东西存在。起初，我必须学会如何编程才能实现这一点。 然后我恰好爱上了编程这门技艺，然后我花了二十年时间真正深入钻研它。但现在我回来了。我又回到了那个拥有一个想法并急不可待希望它在世界上存在的状态，而人工智能几乎把这一切缩短到了几乎不存在的程度。所以这是一种重新发现的加速过程。现在，我明白这并不适用于每个人。有很多程序员从一开始就热爱编程，他们被逻辑结构等吸引。我的意思是，我已经经历了二十年，所以我明白。但我也认为，你能够发现自己新的侧面—— ……如果你让它进入的话。再一次，我不断回到这个几乎是‘最小化遗憾’的框架，借用杰夫·贝佐斯的话来说。两年后的你会不会看着自己想，‘哦，我很糟糕地花时间抱怨现在，抱怨我的行业发生了变化’？或者两年后的我会不会回头看这个时刻，为自己勇于面对，为可能经历的悲伤而感到自豪？再次强调，这一切都是有空间的。然后说，‘我要学习这个世界现在如何运转，我不仅要把它做到最好，我要创造更多的可能。’

I mean, it is true, a lot of programmers, a lot of friends of mine, me, obviously you, are having fun.

我的意思是，这是真的，很多程序员，我的很多朋友，我，显然还有你，都在玩得很开心。

I have had more fun with computers in the last three months than at any time previously.

在过去三个月里，我在电脑上玩的比以前任何时候都开心。

Quick bathroom break, and then I gotta ask you about how you actually interact with the systems now.

快速去个洗手间，然后我得问你现在是如何实际与这些系统互动的。

Yes.

是的。

I gotta ask you about how has your setup programming setup changed? So, keyboard, voice, what’s the IDE?

我得问你一下，你的编程环境设置有怎样的变化？比如键盘、语音，还有你用的 IDE 是什么？

It’s crazy to think about now, but yeah, I used TextMate for almost 20 years. I used TextMate starting in 2005, I think. I helped get the first version out, and then I just wasn’t interested. I wasn’t in the market for an alternative. And it wasn’t until the switch to Linux that I was forced out of my habitat. And now with the switch to, what are we calling it? Agentic engineering? Oh, I fucking hate that term. We gotta come up with something that sounds as plain as programming, but encapsulates the fact that it’s with agents. But-

现在回想起来真是疯狂，但没错，我用了 TextMate 将近 20 年。我大概从 2005 年开始用 TextMate。我帮忙推出了第一个版本，然后我就不感兴趣了。我当时也没打算找其他替代品。直到换到 Linux，我才被迫离开自己的舒适区。现在换到，我们叫什么来着？Agentic 工程？哦，我他妈的讨厌这个词。我们得想个听起来像编程一样普通，但又能体现这是关于代理的词。但——

I still think it should be called programming at this point.

我仍然认为此时它应该被称为编程。

… All right, let’s just call it programming. Programming with agents requires a different tool set. It really does. And the main change here is that you’re going from single thread programming in your head to parallel processing. When I was writing code, chiseling it by hand in TextMate or even Neovim not that long ago, I would just focus on one problem at the time, and I would methodically work my way through it, and that was actually the portal to flow. The portal to flow was deep immersion into a single problem, see it through to the end. That’s not how it works with agents, in part because the agents are at once both too fast and too slow. They don’t give you an immediate reply on something that you asked them to do that’s the same as typing on a keyboard. So you have to let the agent cook- … for a bit, and therefore you realize, well, if I just sit around waiting for them, first of all, that doesn’t feel productive. Even if the agent, just one of them, can be highly productive, it does not feel productive. It does not feel good. It feels actually like you’re a little bit useless. And maybe I had a moment when the first agentic moment was there and we, I was running mostly one agent at a time where I felt like, “I don’t know about this.” But you can solve a lot of hard problems by simply throwing more resources at it. This is the whole scaling law of AI itself, right? That if you parallelize these things and you’re not running one agent, but you’re running a handful, you can feel like you’re in a flow state because you’re constantly doing programming work in the sense that you’re making decisions, and you’re helping either unblock an agent because it has a question about which direction to take, or you’re ready for a new task. And to do that, you need a different setup. I started first doing it in tmux and just having separate panes and having separate splits. Basically a terminal with tabs is a good way to think about it. You open a bunch of tabs. I think most humans know exactly how that works. They don’t work in just one tab.

……好吧，我们就称之为编程吧。使用智能体进行编程需要一套不同的工具。真的确实如此。这里的主要变化是，你将从头脑中的单线程编程转向并行处理。就在不久前，当我用 TextMate 或甚至 Neovim 手动雕琢代码时，我只是一次专注于一个问题，并有条不紊地解决它，而那实际上就是进入心流的门户。进入心流的门户就是深度沉浸于单个问题，并将其解决到底。 与代理的运作方式不是这样的，部分原因在于代理既太快又太慢。他们不会像你在键盘上打字那样立即回复你要求他们做的事情。所以你必须让代理处理一会儿……因此你会意识到，如果我只是坐在那里等待他们，首先，这种感觉并不高效。即使代理中的某一个可以高度高效，也不会感觉高效。感觉并不好。实际上会让你觉得自己有点没用。 也许我曾有过一个时刻，当第一个具有自主性的时刻出现时，而我大多数时候是一次只运行一个智能体，我感到，“我不确定这个。”但是你可以通过简单地投入更多资源解决许多难题。这就是人工智能自身的整个规模化法则，对吧？如果你把这些事情并行化，不只是运行一个智能体，而是运行一小批智能体，你会感觉像是在一个流动状态中，因为你不断地在做编程工作，从某种意义上说，你在做决策，并且你要么在帮助某个智能体解除阻碍，因为它在考虑采取哪条方向，要么你已经准备好进行一个新任务。为了做到这一点，你需要一个不同的设置。 我最初是在 tmux 中开始做的，使用不同的窗格和分割。基本上，可以把它当作带标签的终端来理解。你打开很多标签页。我认为大多数人都确切地知道这是怎么回事。他们不会只在一个标签页中工作。

So still sticking to the terminal, CLI.

所以仍然坚持使用终端，命令行界面。

Absolutely.

绝对的。

So you’re not using Claude Code app or the-

所以你没有在使用 Claude Code 应用程序或者那个——

No.

不。

… Codex app or the-

… Codex 应用或那个-

I love the fact that this agent revolution was kicked off in the terminal because I was already a huge fan of TUI’s, terminal user interfaces, and the terminal in general. That feels like a really nice place to be. It’s a beautiful place to be. The modern terminal is just a good-looking place to work. So I like that. And then this fact of having multiple agents, especially once it’s not just multiple agents running on your own machine, but you start running multiple machines. Now tmux alone is not enough to keep track of it, and that’s why as of late I’ve switched to this thing called Herdr. And Herdr is essentially tmux plus agent notifications. So whenever your agent is done and needs something for you, it goes ding, a little bell telling you it’s ready for its human… Is it master or servant? I’m not quite sure always. But it is ready for a decision, and it also keeps track of whether it is working mode or not. So I have this Herdr set up. I have multiple Herdr setups actually running on individual machines. I went on this crazy phase just about a month ago realizing that doing this work on a single machine is not fast enough. It’s like I’ve discovered multi-core programming, but I only have two cores. I’m like, “What if I had 16 cores? What if I had 32 cores? What if I had 64 cores?” So I instantly went out and I bought these amazing KVMs called GL.iNet Comets. And what they do is it’s this little box. You plug in HDMI, you plug in USB and connect it to the computer. It’s like a KVM. So a KVM is a remote way of controlling a computer, but what’s special about this is just how easy it was. You connect this thing in, you go to a webpage, log in once, set one password. Now this thing can hop on your tailnet. This has been the other revolution of the last year for me, is discovering these WireGuard networks. Tailscale is essentially turning all the computers you have into a local network wherever you are. Like right now on my phone, I have direct access to all the computers in my Malibu office. I also have access to all my computers in my Copenhagen office. And I can treat them as though I sat right next to them without having to punch holes in a firewall or set up complicated VPNs. And what this does is it just decreases the friction it takes to get new compute online. So as soon as I discovered this, I looked at my closet, and I realized I had a bunch of mini PCs from prior experiments, and I just said, “What if I just connected all of them?”

我喜欢这个代理革命是在终端里启动的事实，因为我已经是 TUI（终端用户界面）以及终端本身的忠实粉丝。这感觉像是一个非常棒的地方。这是一个美丽的地方。现代终端只是一个外观漂亮的工作场所。所以我喜欢这一点。然后有多个代理的这个事实，尤其是当它不仅仅是在你自己的机器上运行多个代理，而是你开始运行多台机器时。现在仅靠 tmux 已经不足以跟踪它，这就是为什么最近我转而使用一个叫 Herdr 的东西的原因。 Herdr 本质上就是 tmux 加上代理通知。所以每当你的代理完成任务并需要你的操作时，它就会发出叮咚声，一个小铃声提醒你它已经准备好了，需要人类的操作……是主人还是仆人？我并不总是很确定。不过它已经准备好进行决策，而且还能跟踪它是否处于工作模式。所以我就设置了这个 Herdr。我实际上在各个独立的机器上运行了多个 Herdr 设置。大约一个月前，我进入了一个疯狂的阶段，意识到在单台机器上做这些工作速度不够快。这就像我发现了多核编程，但我只有两个核心。我心想，“如果我有 16 个核心会怎样？如果我有 32 个核心会怎样？如果我有 64 个核心会怎样？”所以我立刻出去买了这些令人惊叹的 KVM，叫做 GL.iNet Comets。 他们所做的是这样一个小盒子。你插入 HDMI，插入 USB，然后连接到电脑。它就像一个 KVM。KVM 是一种远程控制电脑的方式，但这个特别之处在于它有多么简单。你把这个东西连接上，打开一个网页，登录一次，设置一个密码。现在，这个东西就可以加入你的 tailnet。对我来说，过去一年另一个革命性的发现是这些 WireGuard 网络。Tailscale 本质上是把你所有的电脑变成一个本地网络，无论你身在何处。就像现在在我的手机上，我可以直接访问我在马里布办公室的所有电脑。我也可以访问我在哥本哈根办公室的所有电脑。 我可以像坐在他们旁边一样对待他们，而无需在防火墙上打孔或设置复杂的 VPN。这所做的就是减少将新计算资源上线所需的摩擦。因此，一旦我发现了这一点，我就看了看我的储物间，意识到我以前做实验留下了一堆迷你电脑，然后我就想，“如果我把它们全部连接起来会怎样？”

Oh, wow.

哦，哇。

And I just connected four of the computers-

而我刚刚连接了四台电脑——

Nice.

很好。

… in a closet. They all had their little Comet, and suddenly I could run agents on more computers at the same time, and I could control them all with Herdr. And it did get to a point where I maxed out my own processing power.

……在一个壁橱里。他们每个人都有自己的小彗星（Comet），突然间我可以在更多电脑上同时运行代理，并且我可以用 Herdr 控制它们全部。确实到了我把自己的处理能力用到极限的地步。

Right.

对。

That I think at about… What do we want to put it? About four to five machines running, I don’t know, three agents. I have about 16 threads. That’s what I can run. And the faster the agents run, of course, the fewer threads I can run, but at the current pace, I can run about 16 threads- … at full acceleration. And that’s part of why I’ve gone from just being excited about the agent moment to being delirious. Because I think as you say, some of it is a little assaulting. Again, we’re on—we’re on a dial-up bandwidth-wise with our computer. I mean, it’s actually hilarious. So you think of I’m sitting here a year ago, right? I’m chiseling my code. I’m writing my lines. And over the course of, like, an hour, I will have written one beautiful controller, one beautiful model. Like, that’s one file. And I’ve really worked on it, right? So maybe there’s 60 lines left. So maybe my bandwidth at this moment is, like, 30 lines an hour. I think that’s even high. Maybe it’s 20 lines an hour. Now I’m running 16 threads. I’m producing at some times hundreds of lines an hour or hundreds of lines of code per hour. Now, let me pause myself there for a hot moment. I hate that metric, right? Like, lines of code is a stupid metric in general to measure these things, and I think it’s right from some in the programming community to ridicule the AI psychosis when everyone talks about the number of lines of code they’re writing, and then you ask them, “What did you build?” And then they’re like, “Well, I…” And then no good answer comes out, right?

我想大概是……我们想放多少呢？大约四到五台机器在运行，我不知道，三名代理。我大概有 16 个线程。这是我能运行的数量。当然，代理运行得越快，我能运行的线程就越少，但按目前的速度，我可以运行大约 16 个线程……在全速加速下。这也是我从对代理时刻感到兴奋变得几乎疯狂的部分原因。因为我认为，就像你说的，其中有些确实有点让人不适。再说一次，我们的计算机带宽就像拨号上网一样。我的意思是，这实际上很搞笑。所以你想想，一年前我坐在这里，对吧？我在琢磨我的代码。我在写我的代码行。 在大约一个小时的时间里，我可能会写出一个漂亮的控制器，一个漂亮的模型。就像，这就是一个文件。而且我真的在认真做它，对吧？所以可能只剩下大约 60 行。所以在这一刻，我的带宽可能是每小时大约 30 行。我觉得这甚至还算高。可能是每小时 20 行。现在我运行 16 个线程。有时我每小时可以产出上百行代码。现在，让我暂停一下自己。我讨厌那个指标，对吧？ 像，代码行数通常是一种愚蠢的衡量这些事情的指标，我认为编程社区中有人嘲笑 AI 精神病是正确的，当每个人都在谈论他们写了多少行代码时，你问他们，“你做了什么？”然后他们会说，“嗯，我……”然后得不到一个好的答案，对吧？

It’s just a nice shorthand to-

这只是一个方便的简写方式，用来——

It is a nice shorthand. It is a representation or encapsulation of how much output that’s coming out. Now, whether the output is good or bad- … is not a referendum on that. But I was producing and producing so much more now, right? And therefore I’m able to keep all these threads going. So that’s the setup. It’s still Neovim, but at this point, I’m not writing a lot of code, so I’m using Neovim as a project browser and then as a way to kick off lazygit to see the change log for what’s there. And even that, I’d say if GitHub was a little faster at showing you your pull request, the web is probably actually a nicer place to do that. I don’t know. There’s also this other tool I’ve been playing with a bit called Hunk, which just produces diffs in a really nice way. So you could look at that too. But I find that when I look at Hunk, I only see the change set, and when I’m reviewing output from an agent, I often want to see the surrounding context. Oh, yeah, so it changed this file, but actually, what do we have in this other file that wasn’t touched but maybe should’ve been touched? So that’s why I still like Neovim as a way of doing it. But it’s all happening, by the way, of course, in Omarchy. So it’s all happening on Linux. And this was the other major breakthrough with agents. Agents love the Unix philosophy. It loves individual tools that it can invoke through the command line, and there is no operating system on Earth of the majors, I’m counting three here, Mac, Windows, Linux, that works as well with that mechanism as Linux. Everything in Linux is either a config file or a CLI tool. Now, that was its main drawback five minutes ago. This was the reason people didn’t like Linux. It’s like it’s all config files and CLI tools. What great irony that the universe has played it upon us that now the drawbacks of Linux five minutes ago are now its major selling points. This was one of the things… I thought I was stuck for a weekend with a Mac four months ago. I thought I had a computer at the place I was going that was a Linux machine, so I didn’t bring my laptop, and I found out when I arrived I only had a Mac Mini. So I was gonna make the best of a bad situation here and set up my Mac in some of the ways I’ve been thinking about with Linux. And you can actually do a lot now. Homebrew has gotten really quite good. Homebrew is the missing package manager for the Mac, and no one has done more to move the Mac forward in terms of ease of setup. But still something as simple as Raycast, I don’t know if you’ve used that. That’s the- There’s no config file that you can just access. You have to go into the GUI, export a file, then take that file, I don’t know, in your freaking backpack on a USB key. And then you can import it somewhere else. You cannot automate the entire setup of your machine. You can’t automate at all the configuration of Mac’s default key bindings. That has to be a manual process where you’re clicking with a mouse like a caveman to set up your machine.

这是一个不错的速记方式。它是对输出量多少的一种表示或封装。现在，输出是好是坏—— ……这并不是对此的公投。但我现在产出越来越多，对吧？因此我能够维持所有这些线程的运转。这就是设置。仍然是 Neovim，但在这个时候，我并没有写大量代码，所以我把 Neovim 作为项目浏览器，然后用它来启动 lazygit 查看已有的更改日志。即便如此，我会说如果 GitHub 在显示你的 pull request 时稍微快一点，网页可能实际上是一个更好的地方来做这件事。我不知道。我还在玩另一个工具，叫 Hunk，它可以非常漂亮地生成差异。所以你也可以看看那个工具。 但我发现，当我看 Hunk 时，我只看到变更集，而当我在审查代理输出时，我通常希望看到周围的上下文。哦，对，所以它更改了这个文件，但实际上，在这个其他文件中我们有什么内容没有被触碰到，但也许应该被触碰到？所以这就是为什么我仍然喜欢用 Neovim 来实现它的方式。不过，顺便说一下，这一切当然都是在 Omarchy 中发生的。所以这一切都是在 Linux 上发生的。这也是使用代理的另一个重大突破。代理喜欢 Unix 哲学。它喜欢可以通过命令行调用的单个工具，而在所有主要操作系统中，我这里算三个，Mac、Windows、Linux，没有哪个操作系统像 Linux 那样与这种机制配合得如此好。 在 Linux 中，一切要么是配置文件，要么是命令行工具。现在，这曾是五分钟前它的主要缺点。这就是人们不喜欢 Linux 的原因。感觉就像全是配置文件和命令行工具。 多么具有讽刺意味啊，宇宙给我们开的玩笑就是，五分钟前 Linux 的缺点，现在却成了它的主要卖点。这是其中的一件事……我以为四个月前我会被困在一个 Mac 上过一个周末。我以为我去的地方有一台 Linux 电脑，所以我没带笔记本，但到达后才发现我只有一台 Mac Mini。所以我打算尽力把这个糟糕的情况变成好机会，用我在 Linux 上思考过的一些方式来设置我的 Mac。现在你实际上可以做很多事情。Homebrew 已经变得非常不错。Homebrew 是 Mac 上缺失的包管理器，在易用性和安装设置方面，没有人比它做得更多来推动 Mac 的发展。 但是即便是像 Raycast 这样简单的东西，我也不知道你是否用过。它——没有可以直接访问的配置文件。你必须进入图形界面，导出一个文件，然后把那个文件放到某处，我不知道，可能是放在你的背包里通过 USB 设备。然后你才能在其他地方导入它。你不能自动化整个机器的设置。你根本不能自动化 Mac 默认按键绑定的配置。那必须是一个手动的过程，需要你像穴居人一样用鼠标点击来设置你的机器。

I mean, there’s ways around it.

我的意思是，有办法解决它。

Not good ones. I looked. I tried hard.

不好。我看了。我很努力地尝试了。

So here’s my—been my journey. Obviously I’m a Linux person, but because of Adobe Premiere, Adobe products, I’m also a Windows person, so oftentimes I would use WSL, Windows Subsystem for Linux.

所以这就是我的——一直以来的旅程。显然我是一个 Linux 用户，但因为 Adobe Premiere 和 Adobe 产品，我也是 Windows 用户，所以我经常使用 WSL，即 Windows 的 Linux 子系统。

Yes.

是的。

So Linux inside Windows, which is… in the agentic era is not a good kind of Linux, ’cause it’s just-

所以在 Windows 里的 Linux，在…能动时代并不是一种好的 Linux，因为它只是-

It’s a sandbox.

这是一个沙箱。

… it’s a sandbox, and you want the Linux to be unleashed to be able to do everything.

……这是一个沙盒，你希望 Linux 被释放出来，以便能够做所有事情。

Correct.

正确。

And so I have now woken up to things like GrayCat, and have w- you know, I’m a keyboard person. Where’s the config file? What, can I basically do everything where an agent can, can set everything up for me and save the configuration so I can replicate it across systems and everything’s automated? And so I had to ask a lot of those questions, and a lot of them are missing.

所以我现在已经开始关注像 GrayCat 这样的东西了，而且我有——你知道，我是一个键盘派的人。配置文件在哪里？什么，我基本上可以让代理做的一切都能做吗，可以为我设置好一切并保存配置，以便我可以在不同系统上复制，而且一切都是自动化的吗？所以我不得不问很多这样的问题，而很多问题都是缺失的。

They don’t have good answers.

他们没有好的答案。

But oftentimes you could actually just build the app yourself.

但很多时候你实际上可以自己构建这个应用程序。

But there are hacks.

但是有一些窍门。

Yeah, they’re hacks.

是的，他们是冒牌货。

There are hacks.

有黑客。

They’re hacks.

他们是业余之人。

You don’t have to live like this, Lex. There’s a better… Actually, this is a great moment.

你不必这样生活，莱克斯。有更好的… 实际上，这是一个很棒的时刻。

Until you have a video editor.

直到你有一个视频编辑器。

So this is a good moment.

所以这是一个好时刻。

Yep.

嗯。

I heard it was your birthday.

我听说是你的生日。

Yeah.

是的。

So I brought a little gift.

所以我带了一个小礼物。

No.

不。

We are going to get you onto the agentic operating system whether you like it or not.

无论你是否愿意，我们都会让你使用能动操作系统。

This is awesome.

这太棒了。

And I asked- … my friends at Dell whether maybe they had a machine that I could get you for your birthday.

我问了……我在戴尔的朋友们，看看他们是否有一台我可以给你作为生日礼物的机器。

Oh, no.

哦，不。

So here’s the machine I use- … which is- … well, the same one I use, but it’s now yours. It’s a-

所以这是我使用的机器——…也就是——嗯，我平时用的那个，但现在是你的了。它是一个——

No

不

… Dell XPS 14- … already set up with Omarchy 4-

… Dell XPS 14- … 已经安装了 Omarchy 4-

Oh, wow

哦，哇

… ready to be configured for you. And once you realize that all your… By the way, we should almost time this. You can be up and running. You have to answer, like, five questions in about one minute. You could literally do it live if you wanted to.

……准备为你配置。一旦你意识到你所有的……顺便说一下，我们几乎该计时了。你可以启动并运行。你必须在大约一分钟内回答五个问题。如果你愿意，你完全可以实时进行。

Oh, Omarchy, beautiful, modern opinion Linux by DHH. Yeah, let’s do it.

哦，Omarchy，美丽、现代的 DHH 的 Linux 观点。是的，我们来做吧。

Yeah, fill it out while I talk. So-

是的，我说话的时候填它。所以—

Cool

酷

… exactly what you realized, that pain on the Mac was the exposure I got for about a weekend, and I tried really hard, and I found some decent workarounds, the main one being that Homebrew now has tabs for GUI apps. Because it’s hilarious to think upon the recent past where people would go to websites, like, “I need Zoom.” They would enter zoom.com, find the download link, download a DMG- … double-click on that, see a weird manual interaction telling them to drag an icon from one place of the screen to the other, and that was how you installed apps. And you’d just do that over and over again until you had all the apps that you wanted, and if you were setting up a new machine and you had, like, 12 apps, you’d go to 12 different websites to download them like a total caveman. Homebrew has solved a lot of that, but it has not solved all of it, and has solved nothing in terms of the-

……正如你所意识到的那样，Mac 上的那种痛苦就是我周末遇到的曝光，我真的很努力，也找到了一些不错的解决方法，主要是 Homebrew 现在为 GUI 应用程序提供了标签页。因为回想起不久前那段日子真的很滑稽，当时人们会去一些网站，比如，“我需要 Zoom。”他们会进入 zoom.com，找到下载链接，下载一个 DMG——然后双击它，会看到一个奇怪的手动操作，告诉他们把一个图标从屏幕的一个地方拖到另一个地方，这就是安装应用的方法。而且你会一遍又一遍地这样做，直到拥有所有你想要的应用，如果你在设置一台新机器，有大约 12 个应用，你就得去 12 个不同的网站去下载它们，就像一个彻头彻尾的原始人。 自制软件已经解决了很多问题，但它并没有解决所有问题，并且在……方面一无所解决

Sorry to interrupt, but look how fast this is going.

抱歉打扰，但看看这进展多快。

Oh, it’s gonna be done in about 40 seconds. And then you’re gonna be inside of Omarchy.

哦，大约 40 秒就完成了。然后你就会进入 Omarchy。

Super is the Windows or Command key on your keyboard. So which one is the Super key?

Super 是你键盘上的 Windows 键或命令键。那么哪个是 Super 键？

Yep, that’s the Windows key. Oh, actually, no, no, you have a special edition.

是的，那是 Windows 键。哦，实际上，不，不，你有一个特别版。

Yeah.

是的。

There are only about six of these computers in the world.

全世界只有大约六台这样的电脑。

Oh, there’s a Super key.

哦，有一个超级键。

It says Super, and look at where the Copilot key is on the other end of the keyboard. That’s the Omarchy logo.

它写着 Super，看一下键盘另一端的 Copilot 键在哪儿。那是 Omarchy 的标志。

Nice. Okay, cool.

很好。好吧，酷。

This was Spencer Bull at Dell, who I’ve been working with on a lot of this stuff. They’ve been incredible.

这是戴尔的斯宾塞·布尔，我一直在和他一起处理很多这些事情。他们非常出色。

They, for a moment, let go of the XPS brand.

他们一时放下了 XPS 品牌。

Yes, they did, last year.

是的，他们去年做了。

And I was like, “This is dumb. This is… XPS is awesome.”

然后我就说，‘这很蠢。这……XPS 很棒。’

It was not just dumb that it got rid of the XPS branding. They also got rid of the Escape key and put in capacitive touch buttons at the top. The mistake that Apple realized like three years ago was terrible, and everyone hated them for them. But now they have an incredible team, and this was actually my first Dell laptop for myself. Because I’ve been using Dell on our servers. Dell was what powered our cloud exit. We’ve been running Dell since the mid-2000s, I think. But I never ran their laptops, because compared to a MacBook, they just weren’t up to the task for me. The XPS’ from 2016, or from 2026, with those Intel Panther Lake chips, are the first Dells that I would personally actually use. And it’s funny because when I got mad at Apple originally, I thought, like, “Do you know what? I should just get a Dell,” because we already used them and whatever, and I got a Dell, and I was like, “Man, I can’t do it. I can’t do it. It’s not good enough.” And then lo and behold, this year they just fixed everything. They fixed the battery life. They fixed the performance. They fixed the compatibility. They fixed the weight. They fixed the screen. That’s a tandem OLED screen-

不仅仅是取消 XPS 品牌很愚蠢。他们还取消了 Escape 键，并在顶部安装了电容触摸按钮。苹果大约三年前意识到的错误非常糟糕，每个人都因此讨厌他们。但现在他们有了一个令人难以置信的团队，而这实际上是我为自己购买的第一台戴尔笔记本电脑。 因为我一直在我们的服务器上使用戴尔。戴尔是支撑我们云退出的动力。我想，我们从 2000 年代中期开始就一直在使用戴尔。但我从未使用过他们的笔记本电脑，因为相比 MacBook，它们对我来说根本不够用。2016 年的 XPS，或者 2026 年的 XPS，搭载那些英特尔 Panther Lake 芯片，是我个人第一次真正会使用的戴尔笔记本。有趣的是，当我最初对苹果生气时，我想，‘你知道吗？我干脆买个戴尔吧’，因为我们已经在用他们的产品什么的，然后我买了戴尔，我心想，‘天啊，我用不了，我用不了，这不够好。’然后你看，今年他们把一切都修好了。他们修好了电池续航，也提升了性能。 他们修复了兼容性。他们修复了重量。他们修复了屏幕。那是一个串联 OLED 屏幕——

Yeah, that’s incredible.

是啊，那真是令人难以置信。

… which means it’s actually better tech than what you’ll get in a freaking MacBook. It’s lighter than a MacBook, and the chip is finally competitive because Intel spent a good five years developing the 18A process node. It took a long time, but now it’s here, and it’s freaking incredible. We finally have competition to Apple M chips- … that can go as long as on battery and can have competitive performance.

……这意味着它实际上比你在一台该死的 MacBook 上得到的技术还要好。它比 MacBook 更轻，而且芯片终于有竞争力了，因为英特尔花了整整五年的时间开发 18A 工艺节点。这花了很长时间，但现在它来了，而且简直令人难以置信。我们终于有了可以与 Apple M 芯片竞争的产品——……它的电池续航时间可以一样长，性能也可以有竞争力。

And there’s a beautiful default theme to this thing, and then what is it? Super Space opens up.

这个东西有一个漂亮的默认主题，然后是什么呢？超级空间打开了。

Actually, you can just push the Omarchy key. It opens up the menu. So now you control everything from there.

实际上，你只需要按下 Omarchy 键。它会打开菜单。现在你可以从那里控制一切。

Oh, same thing as the Super. Okay. Cool.

哦，和超人一样的东西。好吧。酷。

Same thing as Super Space. So this has been a huge change for me, that we finally have Linux machines that you don’t have to make excuses for. Because I don’t mind making excuses because excuses are really just another word for trade-offs. I love that Framework 13 I think I talked about last time. I still like them. They still make good computers. But I think for a lot of people, they didn’t want a DIY experience. They wanted something that just out of the box felt like it was on par in build quality and whatever with Macs, and now we finally have it. So happy birthday.

和超级空间一样。所以这对我来说是一个巨大的变化，我们终于有了不需要开脱的 Linux 机器。因为我不介意开脱，开脱其实就是折衷的另一种说法。我喜欢 Framework 13，我想我上次也谈过它。我仍然喜欢它们。它们仍然制造很好的电脑。但我觉得对于很多人来说，他们并不想要 DIY 的体验。他们想要的是一出来就感觉在做工质量和其它方面都跟 Mac 相当的东西，而现在我们终于有了。所以，生日快乐。

Thank you so much. An Omarchy Dell laptop from DHH is the best birthday present. This is awesome.

非常感谢。来自 DHH 的 Omarchy Dell 笔记本电脑是最好的生日礼物。这太棒了。

Check the screensaver, by the way.

顺便检查一下屏保。

Yeah, it’s kind of amazing. I’m seeing it.

是的，这有点令人惊讶。我看到了。

On that tandem OLED screen-

在那个双屏 OLED 显示器上-

It’s gorgeous.

它很漂亮。

… it is absolutely mind-bogglingly awesome.

……这简直令人难以置信地棒极了。

Look at that. There’s like a retro look to the whole thing. It’s like Fiverr pop-

看看那个。整个东西都有一种复古的感觉。就像 Fiverr 流行风格一样——

It’s like running a bulletin board system in- … the ’90s, which is exactly what I did when I was 14 years old. So for me, it’s a complete throwback and an awesome aesthetic, combining this sense of modern rising culture in Unix with- … this throwback of the ’90s.

这就像是在 90 年代运行一个公告板系统……我 14 岁的时候正是这么做的。所以对我来说，这完全是一种回忆和极棒的美学，将 Unix 中现代上升文化的感觉与 90 年代的回忆结合起来。

Yeah, like a retro look for an agent first OS. It’s crazy.

是啊，就像一个代理的第一个操作系统的复古外观。太疯狂了。

Which again, pairs… This was why I was so excited that- … all these agent harnesses arrived as TUI’s, arrived as CLIs- … has arrived as a terminal because suddenly, a whole new generation of both programmers and regular users discovered the glory of the terminal. The terminal was actually one of the most impressive and productive user interfaces we can have. Now, we’ve built user interfaces since then that were easier to learn. The mouse is a wonderful invention for letting someone who doesn’t know a lot about computers just click around and find things out, but the terminal is for people who want to learn their systems, who wanna learn the keyboard commands.

这再次关联……这就是为什么我如此兴奋——……所有这些代理程序的接口作为 TUI 到达，作为 CLI 到达——……作为终端到达，因为突然之间，全新一代的程序员和普通用户都发现了终端的魅力。终端实际上是我们可以拥有的最令人印象深刻和高效的用户界面之一。现在，我们已经构建了从那时起更易于学习的用户界面。鼠标是一项了不起的发明，它让不太懂计算机的人可以随意点击并发现新东西，但终端是为那些想要学习他们系统、想要学习键盘命令的人准备的。

So you think the TUI is gonna stick around?

所以你认为 TUI 会继续存在吗？

100%. Now, it’s not gonna be the only thing. Of course it’s not, because these labs now have trillion dollar valuations, so they need to be able to reach billions of people. And I don’t think we’re gonna teach billions of people the intricacies of the TUI. So we’re gonna have other tools, and we already have other tools, which is, by the way, one of the sweet things about Linux, the ChatGPT Codex tool.

100%。现在，这不会是唯一的东西。当然不会，因为这些实验室现在市值达到数万亿美元，所以他们需要能够接触到数十亿人。而我认为我们不会教数十亿人 TUI 的复杂细节。所以我们会有其他工具，我们已经有其他工具了，顺便说一句，这也是 Linux 的一个好处，ChatGPT Codex 工具。

Yeah, I saw that.

是的，我看到了。

Literally within two hours of that announcement dropping, I had it wrapped up and ready to go in Omachi. Already now, if you go to… You can actually hit the Omachi key- … and then just write ChatGPT. It should pop up as, like, install.

就在那个公告发布的两小时内，我已经在 Omachi 里准备好了并完成了打包。现在，如果你去……你实际上可以按下 Omachi 键……然后只要写下 ChatGPT。它应该会弹出来，比如，安装。

Nice.

很好。

And then just hit return.

然后只需按回车键。

Sudo password for Lex.

Lex 的 sudo 密码。

Yeah, whatever you put in. And then it’s just gonna install it, and it’s gonna pop it up, and you have ChatGPT.

是的，无论你输入什么。然后它就会安装它，弹出来，你就有 ChatGPT 了。

Nice.

很好。

And that’s how a lot of the apps are, and all the agentic harnesses are built in that way. Tailscale, as I talked about, if you wanna hop on that, is that way. Dropbox. And the reason all these things are in there is because I use them. It’s because I built this system for me, and I thought, first and foremost, how do I build my dream computer just for me? And if I get my dream computer, I am assured there are other people who are gonna have the same dreams as I do.

这就是很多应用程序的运作方式，所有的智能代理工具都是以这种方式构建的。就像我提到的 Tailscale，如果你想使用它，也是这种方式。Dropbox 也是如此。而这些东西之所以存在，是因为我自己使用它们。因为我是为自己构建这个系统，我首先考虑的是，如何为自己打造理想的电脑？如果我得到了我的理想电脑，我相信其他人也会有和我一样的梦想。

Now, you’re obsessed about getting the installation to be under one minute, and a bunch of people asked you online why. So why? Why were you so obsessed to getting the installation to be less than 60 seconds?

现在，你痴迷于让安装时间控制在一分钟以内，而且很多人在网上问你为什么。那么，为什么呢？你为什么如此痴迷于让安装时间少于 60 秒？

First, let me quote Michel Hashimoto, who created Ghostty terminal that’s awesome and also available on Omachi and was also the founder of HashiCorp, who had this great post on X not too long ago that had the killer line, “The pursuit of excellence deserves no explanation.” Wanting to make something as good and as fast and as beautiful as possible has no need for justification. We should want beautiful, fast systems that are a delight to use. Now, the funny thing with the install time is it didn’t actually start with a one-minute mission. I was being modest when it got going. I thought if I could set up my entire system in 15 minutes, it would already be such a dramatic improvement over what came before it that I would be perfectly happy. And it came off the fact that the benchmarking had been skewed so out of whack. You talked about the Commodore 64 being your first computer, right?

首先，让我引用 Michel Hashimoto 的话，他创建了非常棒的 Ghostty 终端，该终端也可以在 Omachi 上使用，同时他也是 HashiCorp 的创始人，他不久前在 X 上发表了一篇很棒的帖子，其中有一句精彩的话：“追求卓越无需解释。”想要把某件事情做得尽可能好、尽可能快、尽可能美丽，是不需要理由的。 我们应该想要美观、快速且使用起来令人愉悦的系统。现在，说到安装时间有趣的地方是，它实际上并不是从一分钟的任务开始的。我在开始时表现得比较谦虚。我本以为如果我能在 15 分钟内设置好整个系统，这相比以前的情况将是如此显著的改进，我会非常满意。这个想法来源于基准测试数据严重失真。你之前说过 Commodore 64 是你的第一台电脑，对吧？

Mm-hmm.

嗯嗯。

When you unwrap that Commodore 64 and you hit the on button, in I think about less than one second, the basic interpreter was ready to accept your command. It was literally almost instant. There was virtually no boot time. Do you know how long it took me to set up a new Mac that I had bought for actually the one app that I still haven’t vibe coded my way into on Linux, which is Adobe Lightroom? Brand-new computer, out of the box. I set it up. There’s a software update. Before I was ready to install Adobe Lightroom that I had it fully up to date, it took 42 minutes. That’s grotesque. That’s absurd. That’s an insult to everyone who likes computers, that you get a new computer and before you can use it, you have to spend 42 minutes doing updates… on something that was already installed on it out of the box from the factory. That is just preposterous, and it’s crazy that that’s not even the worst thing. I also got a PC because all these Linux machines, they come as PCs, right?

当你拆开那台 Commodore 64 并按下开机键时，我认为不到一秒钟，BASIC 解释器就已经准备好接受你的指令。几乎就是瞬间启动。几乎没有启动时间。你知道我花了多久才设置好我新买的 Mac 吗？实际上是为了那一个我在 Linux 上仍然没有用 Vibe 编程解决的应用程序，也就是 Adobe Lightroom。 全新的电脑，刚开箱。我把它设置好了。有一个软件更新。在我准备安装 Adobe Lightroom 之前，我让它完全更新，花了 42 分钟。那太夸张了。那太荒谬了。这对所有喜欢电脑的人来说都是一种侮辱，你买了一台新电脑，在你可以使用之前，你必须花 42 分钟去做更新……更新的东西本来就是出厂预装的。这简直荒唐，而且更疯狂的是，这还不是最糟糕的。我还买了一台 PC，因为所有这些 Linux 机器，它们都是作为 PC 出来的，对吧?

Right.

对。

And they have Windows pre-installed. So I got one. This was just three weeks ago. Brand-new machine, Intel Panther Lake, the whole shebang. An hour and 35 minutes from unwrapping the thing until it’s ready to use. How long did you take before you think you were in Omarchy?

而且它们预装了 Windows。所以我买了一个。这就在三周前。全新机器，Intel Panther Lake，样样俱全。从拆开包装到可以使用只花了一个小时三十五分钟。你自己觉得要多久才算进入 Omarchy？

I mean, it’s less than a minute for sure.

我的意思是，肯定不到一分钟。

A minute.

一分钟。

Yeah.

是的。

We can build computers like this. We have the technology. We’ve had the technology since like 1981 when the Commodore 64 first came out. The fact that we now have a computer that’s a trillion times faster and you have to spend 42 minutes or an hour and a half setting it up before it’s ready to use is so infuriating to me that it became a passion. And it’s funny, just while we were having a little break here, I was talking to Ryan Hughes, my co-conspirator here. We now have, we think, a line where we can create these special turbo images that are pre-made for specific computers because it relies on some knowledge of the hardware, like the Dell XPS. We’re gonna make a Dell XPS turbo image that can install in about 12 seconds. A full Linux system-

我们可以制造这样的计算机。我们有这项技术。自从 1981 年康柏 64（Commodore 64）首次问世以来，我们就拥有这项技术。现在我们有了一台速度快一万亿倍的计算机，但你却得花 42 分钟或一个半小时来进行设置才能使用，这让我感到非常气愤，以至于它成了我的一种激情。这很有趣，就在我们稍作休息的时候，我在跟我的共谋者瑞安·休斯（Ryan Hughes）聊天。我们现在认为有一条路线可以创建这些特殊的 Turbo 镜像，这些镜像是为特定计算机预先制作的，因为它依赖于对硬件的一些了解，比如戴尔 XPS。我们打算制作一个戴尔 XPS 的 Turbo 镜像，它可以在大约 12 秒内安装完成一个完整的 Linux 系统——

Yeah

是的

… installed in about 12 seconds.

……大约在 12 秒内安装完毕。

That’s incredible.

那太不可思议了。

That obsession is what gives me this great satisfaction with using computers, that we do not accept things the way they are. And this is why this agent-accelerated reality that I now inhabit is so invigorating. Because I can look at these kinds of constraints and go, do you know what? I could have stopped when we were at five minutes. That would already have been fast enough. This was the argument on X, right? Why do you keep going? Five minutes is fast enough. Okay, maybe for you, but for me, 12 seconds is a lot more fun. And I always think, try to think these first principles. Okay, in that machine, actually hit the Omarchy key again, and then do speed. You’ll see a list come up, and one of them is, like, disk speed.

这种强迫症带给我用电脑的极大满足感，因为我们不会接受事物本来的样子。这就是为什么我现在所处的由代理加速的现实如此振奋人心。因为我可以看看这些限制，然后想，你知道吗？我们在五分钟时本可以停下，那已经够快了。这就是在 X 上的争论，对吧？你为什么要继续？五分钟已经够快了。好吧，也许对你来说够了，但对我来说，12 秒会有更多乐趣。我总是想着，尝试去思考这些第一性原理。好吧，在那台机器上，再按一次 Omarchy 键，然后选择速度。你会看到一个列表，其中一个是硬盘速度。

Speed test, network speed, disk speed.

速度测试，网络速度，磁盘速度。

Disk speed. Do that one, and then run it. So this is testing the performance of the built-in NVMe drive, and what are you getting?

磁盘速度。先做这个，然后运行它。所以这是在测试内置 NVMe 驱动器的性能，你得到的结果是什么？

Seven GB a second.

七 GB 每秒。

So seven gigabytes a second. That’s how fast that drive is. Why can we not install a Linux distribution in one second? The Omarchy distribution is 5.8 gigabytes. If we can run at seven gig… Now, of course, you can’t actually do that because the USB key is a lot slower than that, but you should be able to maximize the underlying physics and protocols that we’re dealing with, and that’s your goal. We gotta get all the way back down to that.

所以是每秒七吉字节。那就是这个硬盘的速度。为什么我们不能在一秒钟内安装一个 Linux 发行版？Omarchy 发行版是 5.8 吉字节。如果我们可以以每秒七吉字节运行… 当然，你实际上不能那样做，因为 USB 盘要慢得多，但你应该能够最大化我们所处理的基础物理和协议，这就是你的目标。我们必须一直追溯到那个速度。

Yeah. I love that you’re doing a Linux distribution. ‘Cause I mean, you could be do… You could be building anything. But the fact that you’re building a Linux distribution means you’re rethinking about what a computer is, ’cause a operating system is the fundamental, like, the foundation of how-

是的。我喜欢你在做一个 Linux 发行版。因为我的意思是，你本可以做……你本可以构建任何东西。但你正在构建一个 Linux 发行版，这意味着你在重新思考什么是计算机，因为操作系统是基本的，就像，它是如何……的基础。

Yes

是

… you interact with a computer.

…你与计算机互动。

Yes. And it’s been so stale.

是的。而且它已经非常陈旧了。

Yeah, it has.

是的，它已经有了。

The macOS we have today is scarcely different from the macOS we had 10 years ago. In fact, it’s worse in many ways because Apple continues to chokehold the control on users. They don’t want them to install software that they haven’t already said good- … to go for. They don’t want users to reconfigure their hotkeys without doing it manually. They didn’t want to change the 500-millisecond animation switching workspaces. It is an infuriatingly locked-down computer. Now, to Apple’s credit, it’s a pretty good computer for being locked down, but I don’t want a locked-down computer. I wanna own my computer. Better yet, I wanna mutate my computer, and this is where the agentic age needs a new operating system. When you can vibe code whatever app comes to your mind, you should be able to vibe code your operating system. You should be able to change anything, how it looks, how it works, what panels are there, what are not there, and that requires Linux. As simple as that. There are no… None of the other two operating systems can deliver this.

我们今天的 macOS 与十年前的 macOS 几乎没有区别。事实上，在很多方面还更糟，因为苹果继续对用户进行严格控制。他们不希望用户安装他们没有事先认可的软件。他们不希望用户在不手动操作的情况下重新配置快捷键。他们不想改变切换工作区时 500 毫秒的动画。这是一台令人恼火的高度封闭的电脑。不过，要为苹果说一句公道话，它对一台被封锁的电脑来说算是相当不错的，但我不想要一台被封锁的电脑。我想拥有自己的电脑。更好的是，我想改造我的电脑，这就是代理时代需要一个新操作系统的原因。 当你可以随心所欲地编写任何应用程序时，你也应该能够随心所欲地编写你的操作系统。你应该能够改变任何东西，它的外观，它的工作方式，有哪些面板，哪些没有，而这需要 Linux。就是这么简单。其他两个操作系统都无法提供这种能力。

But can you speak to the, I think somebody asked you, like, “Who the hell are you to think you could do better than Ubuntu?” For example. Or like, “Why are you doing it when Ubuntu is already pretty good?” And your answer was, “I thought I could do better.” So can you speak to, this was on X, can you speak to, like, where the craziness comes from, thinking that you as one person or maybe with Ryan, you could start building something that’s going to be better than Ubuntu or Arch or any of this?

但是你能谈谈这个吗，我想有人问过你，比如，“你凭什么认为自己能做得比 Ubuntu 更好？”例如。或者，“既然 Ubuntu 已经很好了，你为什么还要去做？”而你的回答是，“我认为自己可以做得更好。”所以你能谈谈，这是在 X 上说的，你能谈谈，这种疯狂从哪里来的，认为你一个人或者可能和 Ryan 一起，就能开始建立某个比 Ubuntu 或 Arch 或者这些更好的东西？

Well, I’ll say that it didn’t start quite as grandiose. When I got going with my Linux journey, I actually just started with Ubuntu, and I just built on top of it. Here’s a system that already does a lot of the things I wanted to do, and at least it’s Linux. So can I just build on top of it and make it more modern, make it actually look good, and have the programs I wanna use? I got, like, some version of that, and then I discovered that there’s seven layers deeper you could go, and as, the closer you get to the metal, the closer you get to the kernel, the closer you get to the individual packages and so forth, the more freedom you discover. So as I discovered more and more freedom, I got more and more ambitious, and I realized, oh, surprise, surprise, I have strong opinions about how computers should work, how they should look, what programs should be installed, and whether they should take 42 minutes to install or 45 seconds. That’s the current world record, by the way. So if anyone installs Omarchy Quattro after this and can beat 45 seconds, take a screenshot, send it to me, and you’ll be the new holder of the world record.

嗯，我会说一开始并没有那么宏大。当我开始我的 Linux 之旅时，我实际上只是从 Ubuntu 入手的，然后在它的基础上进行构建。这里有一个系统已经做了很多我想做的事情，而且至少它是 Linux。那么我能否就在它的基础上构建，使它更现代，看起来更好，并拥有我想用的程序呢？我实现了某种程度的这种想法，然后我发现你可以深入到七层，更接近底层，越接近内核，越接近各个独立的软件包，你就会发现更多的自由。 所以随着我发现越来越多的自由，我变得越来越有野心，我意识到，哦，惊喜，惊喜，我对计算机应该如何工作、应该如何外观、应该安装哪些程序，以及它们安装需要 42 分钟还是 45 秒有强烈的意见。顺便说一下，目前的世界纪录就是 45 秒。所以如果有人在此之后安装 Omarchy Quattro 并能打破 45 秒，截个图，发给我，你就会成为新的世界纪录保持者。

When—how long ago did you cross the 60-second mark?

你——多久以前超过了 60 秒的标记？

It’s funny because it’s like that the old limit on, what was it? It was a four-minute mile or something- … like that in 1952- … that people thought was impossible for humans to beat. Then one guy beats it, and literally within the next few months, three more guys do, right? So we had this goal. I originally had the goal, it was two minutes. And then we beat two minutes, and I’m like, “Well, if we beat two minutes, why can’t we beat one minute?” And I remember thinking like, “That’d be crazy. You can’t install a modern operating system in one minute when they’re all…” If the other ones are taking 42 minutes, right? Like Apple, full of a lot of smart people, like, it took 42 minutes, so that’s gotta be the bar. No, no, it’s not the bar because there’s no speed limit. Like, none of the things you take for granted are fixed pillars of reality in almost any case. Until you get down to the seven gigabytes per second that drive is able to transfer, you’ve not reached the limit yet, so you should just keep pushing. And of course, then it becomes a game in itself and a satisfaction itself. Every second I could shave off was an excitement. And when we broke the one-minute barrier, which was really only broken, I think, three weeks ago or something like that, maybe even two weeks ago, I just got crazy. And then I got a swarm of agents to run all these auto research loops of trying all these different theories on like, oh, if you change this thing, if you change that thing, what if you cut this out? What if you do things in parallel? What if while you were typing in your username, we start preloading packages into memory system, we can fire them in faster. And it becomes a fun game. And I think that’s how you should think about product development. It should be fun. You should, it should be frivolous. It should be trying to overshoot the target and making it so much better than what it, quote unquote, needs to be.

很有趣，因为就像以前的那个极限，是什么来着？好像是四分钟一英里还是怎样的……就像 1952 年……人们认为人类不可能打破的记录。然后有个人打破了它，接着在接下来的几个月里，又有三个人做到了，对吧？所以我们有了这个目标。我最初的目标是两分钟。 然后我们打破了两分钟纪录，我当时想，“好吧，如果我们能打破两分钟，为什么不能打破一分钟呢？”我记得当时想着，“那太疯狂了。当所有的系统都……”如果其他系统都需要 42 分钟，对吧？像苹果公司，有很多聪明人，也用了 42 分钟，所以那应该就是极限了。不，不，那不是极限，因为没有速度限制。几乎在任何情况下，你习以为常的事情都不是固定不变的现实支柱。直到你达到那块硬盘每秒七吉字节的传输速度，你还没有达到极限，所以你应该继续努力。当然，这最终本身就变成了一种游戏，也是一种满足感。 每节省的一秒钟都是一种兴奋。当我们突破一分钟的障碍时，其实那真正被打破大概是在三周前，或者可能甚至是两周前，我简直疯狂了。然后我让一群代理运行所有这些自动研究循环，尝试各种不同的理论，比如，如果你改变这个，如果你改变那个，如果你去掉这个会怎样？如果你并行处理会怎样？如果在你输入用户名的同时，我们开始将软件包预加载到内存系统中，我们可以更快地启动它们。这变成了一种有趣的游戏。我认为这就是你应该如何看待产品开发的方式。它应该是有趣的，你应该，它应该是轻松随意的。 它应该尝试超越目标，并使其比所谓“必须达到的水平”好得多。

Especially now because you can move so quickly and you can try so many different approaches because of the agents.

尤其是现在，因为你可以移动得如此迅速，并且可以尝试许多不同的方法，这都是由于这些代理。

Yes, that just makes it more satisfying. But I think this was always true. If you look at the greatest Mercedes-Benz of all time, I think it was called the W126. I saw this wonderful documentary on it. It was steered by this guy who for years had worked in Mercedes’ department for safety. And suddenly he gets put in charge for the whole S-Class project, and he just puts in all of it. This is where you got the auto-retending seat belts and washers on the headlights and everything. This car was so overbuilt for the market. It was unbelievable. But you look at that and go like, “Well, I want that.” In just the same way that you look at a mechanical watch and go, “It could go down to 100 meters?” Or, or I think Rolex has one that can go down to 4,000 meters, the, the deep ocean, the deep diver ocean- … or whatever it’s called. No one outside of three people in the world, whoever buy that watch, will ever put it to the test. But don’t you wanna be the kind of person who is a patron of people who wanna push the human race that much forward? I want the fastest car breaking the speed limits. I want the diver watch that can go down the Mariana Trench. I want the operating system that can install in less than 60 seconds.

是的，这反而让它更让人满足。但我认为这一直都是事实。如果你看看有史以来最伟大的梅赛德斯-奔驰，我认为它叫做 W126。我看过一部关于它的精彩纪录片。它的负责人是一个多年来一直在梅赛德斯安全部门工作的人。突然之间，他被任命负责整个 S 级项目，他把所有想法都投入进去。正是在这款车上，你能看到自动回位安全带、车头灯清洗器等等。这辆车对市场来说配置过于豪华。 这令人难以置信。但你看着那个东西就会想，‘嗯，我想要那个。’就像你看着一个机械表时会想，‘它可以下潜到 100 米吗？’或者，我记得劳力士有一款可以下潜到 4000 米，下到深海，深海潜水区——或者不管它叫什么名字。世界上除了三个人里购买那块手表的人以外，没有人会真正去测试它。但是，你难道不想成为那种支持那些想要推动人类进步的人吗？我想要最快的车，超越速度极限。我想要可以下潜到马里亚纳海沟的潜水表。我想要能在不到 60 秒内安装的操作系统。

So from the individual level, I admire those people. I think everybody should strive for that. But also the consequences of that we should mention, like the pursuit of excellence, even when the metrics seem to be frivolous, the maybe unexpected consequences of that is other kinds of excellences, discoveries, innovations, and all that kind of stuff that has nothing to do with the speed.

所以从个人层面来说，我钦佩那些人。我认为每个人都应该为此努力。但我们也应该提到其后果，比如对卓越的追求，即使当时的衡量标准看起来微不足道，这种追求可能带来的意想不到的结果是其他类型的卓越、发现、创新，以及所有与速度无关的那些东西。

100%.

100%.

It’s discovery. It’s nice to have the metric that you’re chasing be the catalyst, the engine that drives innovation, because you’ll just discover. It’s the same reason you go to the moon, you go to Mars. It’s like, why? Who cares? Well, actually, the real thing is you’ll discover a lot about chemical propulsion. You’ll discover a lot about how humans can live for a long time in space. Maybe you’ll discover whole new ways of doing solar energy in space or data centers in space or whatever the hell.

这是发现。追求指标本身成为催化剂、推动创新的引擎，这很棒，因为你会不断发现。这也是你去月球、去火星的原因。就像，为什么要去？谁在乎呢？其实，真正的意义在于你会发现很多关于化学推进的知识。你会发现很多关于人类如何在太空中长时间生存的知识。也许你会发现完全新的在太空中利用太阳能或者建立数据中心的方法，或者其他任何事物。

That’s right.

没错。

All kinds of… Maybe you’ll meet-

各种各样的……也许你会遇到——

That’s right.

没错。

… aliens, but you never know. But setting a goal and chasing it, especially when it’s numerical, is really nice.

……外星人，但你永远不会知道。不过设定一个目标并去追求它，尤其是当它是数字化的时候，真的很好。

And setting a grand goal is even better. When you refuse to just do what’s practical and you strive for what’s slightly beyond plausible, that’s when the magic happens. And we should be going all in on that. This is one of the reasons… And in fact, to some degree, this specific goal was motivated by seeing others do this. I mean, Elon is the singular individual in this conversation. The guy is so out there in his goals. They seem so preposterous at first glance. I’ve certainly considered them preposterous on many glances. And then you realize that they come true sometimes. Maybe not always on schedule, and so what? So what? So we didn’t get the self-driving car on schedule. I gave Elon a lot of shit for that back in ’17. But now it’s here, and who would have gotten us here except for the person who thought it was possible in ’17, who is so impatient with reality that the sheer force is just gonna propel that reality to the place he wants it to be. I think that’s deeply inspiring, and we need these kinds of goalposts to be moved. We need someone to run the four-minute mile, so the rest of us realize, “Well, okay, but I guess I can run it quicker.” That’s what I try to strive for, and I really strive for with Omarchy because it’s just more fun to live that way, to have high aspirations and ambitions. And I will say I’ve actually changed my mind on that a little bit. I spent quite a lot of time speaking the other book that there are a lot of people who don’t actually need those ambitions. And I also– That’s also true. We don’t want 8 billion Elons running around the world. Would be rather crazy, I think. But I’ve come to realize that for entrepreneurs, it’s healthy to have suitable chunky goals. The idea of just running the Italian restaurant can’t just be that. It should be maybe I just run the one Italian restaurant, but I make the best damn pizza possible. I make the most delicious Parmesan. We have to strive for excellence to muster the motivation to keep going.

设定一个宏伟的目标更好。当你拒绝只做实际可行的事情，而是追求略微超出可能的目标时，那就是魔力发生的时刻。而我们应该全力以赴去做这件事。这就是其中一个原因……实际上，在某种程度上，这个具体目标的动机是受到看到别人这样做的启发。我的意思是，埃隆在这方面是独一无二的人。这家伙的目标如此异乎寻常。一开始看起来似乎很荒谬。我在很多次看到的时候确实认为它们荒谬。然后你会意识到它们有时会实现。也许不总是按计划，而那又怎样？那又怎样？所以我们没有按计划推出自动驾驶汽车。2017 年我为此对埃隆骂了他一顿。 但现在它来了，如果不是那个在 2017 年认为这是可能的人，我们怎么会到这里呢？他对现实极度不耐烦，以至于单凭意志力就能将现实推进到他想要的地方。我认为这非常鼓舞人心，我们需要这样的目标不断被推动。我们需要有人跑出四分钟英里，这样其他人才能意识到，“好吧，我也许可以跑得更快。”这就是我努力追求的目标，我在 Omarchy 中也是真的努力追求，因为以这种方式生活更有趣，有高远的志向和抱负。我也会说，我实际上对此有一点改变了看法。我花了相当多的时间在另一本书中说，有很多人实际上并不需要那些抱负。 我也——这也是真的。我们不想让世界上到处都是 80 亿个埃隆。我觉得那会相当疯狂。但我逐渐意识到，对于企业家来说，设定适当的重大目标是健康的。单单经营一家意大利餐厅的想法不能仅仅是这样。也许我只是经营那一家意大利餐厅，但我要做出最棒的比萨。我要做出最美味的帕尔马干酪。我们必须追求卓越，才能激发继续前进的动力。

And yeah, to dare to think big like you could build a Linux-

是的，敢于有大梦想，比如你可能会建立一个 Linux-

Yes.

是的。

… distribution. Is there some stuff you remember about what it took to get us to be so fast? You mentioned a few things that were, the agents were discovering.

……分发。你还记得我们是如何做到这么快的一些东西吗？你提到了一些东西，代理正在发现的东西。

One of the things was to treat the lag of human input as an opportunity to preload. So there’s five questions you answer when you set up an Omarchy machine. So it’s doing stuff in the background. We’re doing stuff in the background. And that was one of the things I didn’t even consider, which is, I mean, the oldest trick in the book. All sorts of video games for a long time have done this, where you let the player interact with something, and then you do preloading and so forth in the background. So it’s an age-old technique, but I just hadn’t thought about it for an installer. I thought, first you ask the user some questions about their password and their username and their time zone and so forth, and then you do the work, when, in fact, you could preload that. Now, the other things were just a bunch of other tweaks to how the installer itself was doing things in a certain order. Some of them was also just shrinking it. The last version of Omarchy was 7.5 gigabytes, and a lot of the time we’re down to now is literally decompressing compressed package files. That’s the bulk of what the- is on the ISO, and that’s the bulk of the install time. So by shrinking it down to, I think we’re at 5.85 gigabytes now, a pretty chunky reduction, it almost literally translated one-to-one, and I did some really interesting things there. So Omarchy uses the JetBrains font, which is an awesome font, beautiful font, and actually a font I didn’t like at first glance, but then it was the only font I could get to look perfect in Mitchell Hashimoto’s Ghostty. Ghostty, for whatever reason, did not wanna render my beloved Bitstream Vera Sans just the way I was used to it. Mm-hmm. But it rendered this JetBrains font perfectly, so I switched over. But it… The standard package for JetBrains font on Arch is 200 megabytes because it includes all these variations and all these subtypes and whatever. And I realized, like, we’re not using any of that. We’re using the monospace version in this one Nerd Font patched edition. Do you know how big that is? I think it’s 16 megabytes. Hmm. So I simply just came up with a new package, the slim version- Mm-hmm … of the JetBrains package. Nice. And there, right there, I saved 180 megabytes. I just went through and did that a bunch of times. We did that with the NVIDIA drivers too. So the NVIDIA drivers, when they came straight off the, I think the Arch repo, were not compressed with the most extreme form of compression, which I think called ZSTD, which is a really slow form of compression. It’s slow to create the archive, but if you’re building a package- Hmm … you have all the time in the world if that means you can then shrink the ISO. So on just the two NVIDIA packages, I think we saved 200 megabytes. Mm-hmm. So what I loved about this was I imagined myself being a car designer at McLaren. So McLaren makes some of the lightest super sports cars in the world right now, and they are absolutely obsessed with shaving every damn last gram off their cars. That’s why even a new 750S McLaren is just way lighter than the competition. They use a carbon fiber monocoque, and that helps them over like Ferrari, for example, that uses aluminum. But they also just have this obsession with weight, and I would see this interview with the McLaren folks talking to some journalist just going over, “Yeah, we saved 370 grams off that one.” And I just went, “Wait, what? There’s someone on a car that weighs maybe 1,040 kilos or 1,380 or something. They’re worrying about 370 grams?” Yeah. What obsessed maniacs. Yeah. I love them. Yeah. I want that in my life. I want a McLaren just for that reason. So I thought in that moment as I was shaving individual megabytes off the packages, man, I’m kinda like a McLaren car developer here, even though I mean, we haven’t even completed that work. The package could shrink even more. But this is actually this other conflict that we’ve had with Omarchy and the traditional Linux community is bloat. This idea that it’s actually not kosher in certain circles to ship with pre-installed software because who are you to make decisions about what programs people should use? And I’m like, “Dude, it’s in the fucking name. It’s called Omarchy because the Oma part is short for omakase, which literally means chef’s choice. I’m the chef. I’m making the choices, and this is the collection of applications I think is awesome,” which by the way has a video editor. It ships with OBS to do your recording. It’s just in there. Yeah. OBS is pre-installed. Nice. Kdenlive is a video editor, timeline editor, which is great. I edit all my videos with that. And then I made my own clip editor. You talked about the thing with syncing up. Yeah. I had this thing with clips, so I would do a podcast or whatever. I need a clip for X. And it’s kind of a hassle to use Kdenlive or other timeline editors, so I made Omacut. Omacut is included too. Omacut, cool. It’s just for making clips, and you can drive the whole thing with keyboard. So you can go to just the right time mark. and then you can hit Control + Space. It moves the clip line to that line. Then you go to the end of the clip, and you hit Alt + Space, and it moves the end line. Nice. And then you hit Control + S, and it saves. Nice. I can make clips so damn fast now with Omacut. It’s amazing. But it has all the software on it. It has Neovim on it. It has Herdr on it. It has Tmux. It has a terminal. It has a bunch of themes. It has a bunch of background images, the best ones I could pick out. That takes up some space. It should because this is not supposed to be this just barren landscape where you have to reconstruct everything. This is supposed to be a productive system the minute you unpack it. What is it built in? So it’s actually mostly built in Bash for the Linux configuration part. Right. Bash is a great language for that. It is made for that really, for system administration. It also has its limitations. You should not build everything in Bash.

其中一件事是将人类输入的延迟视为预加载的机会。所以在设置 Omarchy 机器时，你需要回答五个问题。所以它在后台执行一些操作。我们也在后台执行一些操作。这是我之前甚至都没考虑过的事情，也就是说，这是最古老的技巧之一。很长一段时间以来，各种视频游戏都使用过这种方法，你让玩家与某些东西互动，然后在后台进行预加载等等。这是一个古老的技巧，但我只是没想到可以在安装程序中使用它。 我原以为，你应该先问用户一些关于他们密码、用户名、时区等等的问题，然后再去做实际工作，但事实上，你可以预先加载这些信息。其他的改动只是对安装程序本身按某种顺序执行操作的调整。其中一些改动只是为了缩小体积。Omarchy 的最后一个版本是 7.5GB，而现在大部分时间实际上是解压压缩包文件。这就是 ISO 上的大部分内容，也是安装时间的大部分。因此，通过将其缩小到，我记得现在是 5.85GB，一个相当可观的减少，几乎是字面上一对一的转换，我在这里做了一些非常有趣的事情。 所以 Omarchy 使用 JetBrains 字体，这是一款很棒的字体，非常漂亮，实际上这也是一款我起初并不喜欢的字体，但后来它是唯一一个我能在 Mitchell Hashimoto 的 Ghostty 上显示完美的字体。Ghostty 不知道为什么，不能像我习惯的那样渲染我最爱的 Bitstream Vera Sans。嗯哼。但它可以完美渲染这个 JetBrains 字体，所以我就换了过去。但是… JetBrains 字体在 Arch 上的标准包有 200 兆字节，因为它包含了所有这些变体和这些子类型等等。我意识到，我们根本没用到这些。我们只用了这个 Nerd Font 补丁版中的等宽版本。你知道它有多大吗？我想是 16 兆字节。嗯。 所以我干脆就想出了一个新套件，瘦版——嗯哼……JetBrains 套件的瘦版。不错。就在那儿，我就节省了 180 兆字节。我就这样反复做了好几次。我们对 NVIDIA 驱动也做了同样的处理。所以 NVIDIA 驱动，当它们直接从，我想是 Arch 仓库来的时候，并没有使用最极端的压缩形式，我记得叫 ZSTD，这是一种非常慢的压缩形式。创建归档文件很慢，但是如果你在构建一个套件——嗯……你有所有的时间，如果这意味着你能够缩小 ISO 文件的话。所以仅在两个 NVIDIA 套件上，我认为我们节省了 200 兆字节。嗯哼。所以我喜欢这一点的原因是，我想象自己是迈凯轮的一名汽车设计师。 所以迈凯伦目前制造了一些世界上最轻的超级跑车，他们对每一克车身重量的削减都痴迷不已。这也是为什么即使是全新的 750S 迈凯伦，也比竞争对手轻得多的原因。他们使用碳纤维单体壳，这让他们比使用铝材的比如法拉利更轻。但他们同样对重量有着近乎病态的执念，我看到过一次迈凯伦团队接受记者采访，他们说着：“是的，我们在那一辆车上减轻了 370 克。”我当时就想，“等等，什么？这辆车的重量可能是 1040 公斤或者 1380 公斤左右，他们居然在意 370 克？”真是些痴迷的狂人。是的，我喜欢他们。是的，我希望这能成为我生活的一部分。 我就是因为这个原因想要一辆迈凯轮。所以当我在一个个删减软件包的兆字节时，我就在想，伙计，我有点像一个迈凯轮汽车开发者，尽管我的意思是，我们甚至还没完成那项工作。软件包可能还会进一步缩小。但实际上，这是我们与 Omarchy 和传统 Linux 社区之间的另一个冲突——臃肿。在某些圈子里，预装软件实际上是不被认可的，因为你算什么东西去决定别人应该使用哪些程序？我当时就想，“伙计，它名字里就有它。叫 Omarchy，因为 Oma 部分是 omakase 的缩写，字面意思是‘主厨之选’。我就是主厨。” “我是自己做选择的，这是我认为很棒的应用程序集合，”顺便说一下，它有一个视频编辑器。它附带了 OBS 来进行录制。它就在那里。对，OBS 是预装的。很不错。Kdenlive 是一个视频编辑器，时间线编辑器，非常棒。我用它编辑所有的视频。然后我还做了自己的剪辑编辑器。你提到了同步的事情。是的，我有这个剪辑方面的需求，比如我会做一个播客或者其他内容。我需要为某个内容剪辑一个片段。使用 Kdenlive 或其他时间线编辑器有点麻烦，所以我做了 Omacut。Omacut 也包含在内。Omacut，很棒。它只是用来制作剪辑，并且你可以完全用键盘操作整个流程。这样你就可以直接跳到正确的时间标记。 然后你可以按 Control + 空格。它会把剪辑线移动到那一行。然后你去到剪辑的末尾，按 Alt + 空格，它会移动结束线。不错。然后你按 Control + S，它就会保存。不错。我现在用 Omacut 剪辑速度快得惊人。这太棒了。但是它上面装了所有的软件。它有 Neovim。它有 Herdr。它有 Tmux。它有终端。它有一堆主题。它有一堆背景图片，我挑出的都是最好的。这占了一些空间。也应该占一些空间，因为这里本来就不应该只是一个空旷的环境，你得从零重建一切。这本来就是一个打开就能用的高效系统。它是用什么构建的？ 所以实际上主要是为 Linux 配置部分用 Bash 构建的。对，Bash 对此非常适合。它确实是为此而设计的，真正是为了系统管理。不过它也有局限性。你不应该在 Bash 中构建所有东西。

How are agents with generating Bash? Pretty good?

使用 Bash 生成的代理怎么样？挺好吗？

Oh, amazing.

哦，太棒了。

Okay.

好的。

Except for one thing, and I have to smack the agents over the back of the head every single time I catch it, and remind it to look at the agent’s MD file, because I will have an instruction in there not to make early exits. The agents love to have preconditions instead of fully expanded conditionals. I like something that says, “If this, then do that.” Agents like to have precondition or exit, another precondition or exit. And then it falls down to the final thing it actually wants to do. I hate that style. So except for that, it’s gotten shockingly, dramatically, awesomely good, to the point where when we talked last time, we talked about how I would ask the agent for a Bash thing, and then I would type it in myself, and I kinda wouldn’t remember. And then I took the effort to make sure that all that competence wasn’t draining out of my fingers, so I actually learned how to write Bash myself, and now I’m not writing any Bash myself. I have not written any Bash myself for probably a couple months, because the agents have just gotten so good, that if you give them the few pointers on style, and occasionally put pushback on complexity… This is… I tweeted about this a couple of days ago. It blows my mind how often an agent can do something, say it’s done, have the work reviewed by another agent- … they say it’s done, and then I go like, “Eh, looks a little too complicated for me.” And then it’ll go like, “Oh, yeah, you’re right. You’re right. I totally overcomplicated this,” and it’ll cut it in half. I’m like, “Couldn’t it just do this, like, from the outset?” And then someone else reminded me, humans are the same way. If you work on something and someone else reviews it and they just are like, “Eh, it looks a little complicated,” quite often you’re able to go like, “Ah, you’re right.”

除了有一件事，每次我发现它时，我都必须拍打代理人的后脑勺，并提醒它查看代理人的 MD 文件，因为我会在里面有一条指示，不允许提前退出。代理人喜欢使用前置条件，而不是完全展开的条件语句。我喜欢那种写着“如果这样，那么就做那样”的东西。代理人喜欢使用前置条件或退出，再或者另一个前置条件或退出。 然后它就跌落到它真正想做的最终事情。我讨厌那种风格。除了这一点，它已经变得令人震惊、戏剧化、惊人地好，以至于上次我们谈话时，我们讨论了我会向代理请求一个 Bash 脚本，然后我自己输入它，而我几乎都记不住。然后我花时间确保所有这些能力不会从我的指尖流失，所以我实际上学会了自己写 Bash，现在我自己根本不写 Bash。我自己可能有几个月没写 Bash 了，因为代理已经变得太好了，如果你给它们一些风格上的提示，偶尔对复杂性提出一些反对……这是……我几天前在推特上发过这个。 让我震惊的是，一个代理经常可以做某件事，说它做完了，然后让另一个代理审查工作——… 他们说做完了，然后我就会想，‘嗯，对我来说看起来有点太复杂了。’然后它就会说，‘哦，对，你说得对，你说得对，我完全把这个复杂化了，’然后就把它减半。我心想，‘难道一开始就不能这样做吗？’然后有人提醒我，人类也是这样的。如果你在做某件事，有人审查它，他们只是说，‘嗯，看起来有点复杂，’通常你也会觉得，‘啊，你说得对。’

See, that just… Those little indications to me show that the programmer is still needed, that intuition, ’cause I think, what did you say? I have a sense of the landscape of the code.

你看，那只是……那些小小的迹象对我来说显示出程序员仍然是必要的，那种直觉，因为我想，你说什么来着？我对代码的整体布局有一种感觉。

When I build something like Omarchy, I do look at the code. I look at the shape.

当我构建像 Omarchy 这样的东西时，我会查看代码。我会看它的形状。

Yeah.

是的。

And I look at the proportions.

我看了看比例。

Yeah.

是的。

Like, I don’t have to chisel everything myself anymore. This is, again, when I’m flattering myself for… Not one moment I’m a McLaren auto engineer, and the next moment I’m a da Vinci, working with his whole studio of students- … who are doing all the chiseling on the, the fine marble, right? And he goes like, “Ah, no, the proportions are not quite right.” That’s how it feels working with agents now, that I can give feedback like an editor. That, do you know what? I’m not gonna write everything myself, but I can tell you when the argument doesn’t land. I can tell you when the shape isn’t proportional to the problem, or when it just feels like it’s too complicated. And shockingly often, it just works. It’s like the early days, where the joke was, “Don’t make mistakes.” I don’t think you have to tell the agents that anymore, because now the harnesses are so good, they run automated testing. They get that feedback. But you actually do have to tell them, “Make it simpler.”

就像，我不再需要自己刻所有东西了。再次强调，这时候我是在自我恭维……不是一会儿我像麦克拉伦的汽车工程师，一会儿又像达芬奇，和他整个学生工作室一起工作——……那些学生在精细的大理石上做所有的雕刻，对吧？然后他会说，‘啊，不，这个比例不太对。’现在和经纪人合作的感觉就是这样，我可以像编辑一样提供反馈。 你知道吗？我不会自己写所有东西，但我可以告诉你什么时候论证不起作用。我可以告诉你什么时候形式与问题不成比例，或者什么时候它感觉太复杂了。而且令人震惊的是，很多时候，它就奏效了。这就像早期的日子，笑话是，“别犯错。”我觉得现在不需要再告诉代理们这个了，因为现在的工具如此先进，它们会进行自动化测试，它们会得到反馈。但你确实需要告诉他们，“简化它。”

Do you use voice at all for the interaction? Or are you… How much are you typing? How much are you-

你在互动中会使用语音吗？还是说你……你打字的多少？你-

I type the whole thing. I actually, in Omarchy’s built-in Voxtype- … Audio transcription, and it’s actually really good. I just find that I don’t think that way, and it surprised myself that I don’t like to talk to the computer. I like when I’m in the car, but when I’m in front of the keyboard, I just wanna type. I also just love typing. Are you using the voice?

我把整件事情都打出来了。实际上，在 Omarchy 内置的 Voxtype……音频转录功能里，它实际上非常不错。我只是觉得我自己不是那样思考的，并且我很惊讶我自己不喜欢跟电脑说话。我喜欢在车里用语音，但当我坐在键盘前时，我只想打字。我也只是非常喜欢打字。你在用语音吗？

I’m an introvert who doesn’t like social interaction- … or speaking. And-

我是一个不喜欢社交互动……也不喜欢说话的内向者。而且——

I think that’s part of mine too.

我认为那也是我自己的一部分。

But, like, for me, for some reason, voice is really powerful. I want to give this… So I run with this thing. It’s called Plaud. So I just hook it up on my, you know on my T-shirt here. You press a button, it starts recording. And this is actually more, in terms of flow, much better experience than behind a computer. And I save, well, usually it’s agent generated problems that I wanna really talk through. And so I write, I speak a long prompt, like, and a lot of it, it’s like stream of consciousness reasoning. So I’ll sometimes just change my mind about a design, but all of that is in there, and then I have an LLM that processes that. With Plaud, there’s a, obviously an API. You can grab it, transcribe it, clean up the transcript, ’cause you want it to be… ‘Cause I’m referring to files. I’m referring to technical concepts, like files and functions- … and so on, that you wanna make sure the transcription, the- … the speech-to-text gets correctly. So you wanna have a dictionary. You want it to be aware of the code base when you process the files. And then you have this gigantic thing that’s often 10, 15, 20 minute me discussing the full design, and I find that to be really, really powerful. Because it doesn’t have the problem of overspecification because of how much stream of consciousness thinking the system has about what you’re imagining. And this is really good for the early steps of a design. Like, if I wanted to build Omarchy from scratch, the first stages, I talk through. It could be an hour. There’s been prompts that I had for an hour, and I’m just running and-

但是，像，对我来说，不知道为什么，声音真的很有力量。我想要传达这个…所以我就顺着这个做。这叫做 Plaud。所以我就把它连到我的，你知道的，我的 T 恤上。 你按下一个按钮，它就开始录音。实际上，就流程而言，这种体验比在电脑前要好得多。我通常会保存——通常是我想深入讨论的代理生成的问题。所以我会写下，或者说出来一个很长的提示，其中很多是意识流的推理。所以我有时会改变设计的想法，但所有这些都包含在里面，然后我有一个大语言模型来处理这些内容。在 Plaud 上，很明显有一个 API。你可以获取它，转录音频，清理转录稿，因为你希望它……因为我会引用文件。我会引用技术概念，比如文件和函数……等等，你想确保转录内容，那个…… …语音转文字能够正确识别。所以你想要有一本词典。你希望在处理文件时它能够了解代码库。然后你会有这样一个庞大的东西，通常是 10、15、20 分钟我在讨论完整的设计，而我觉得这非常非常强大。因为它不会有过度规范化的问题，这是因为系统对你想象的东西有大量意识流的思考。这对于设计的早期阶段非常有用。比如，如果我想从零开始构建 Omarchy，第一阶段，我会讲述整个过程。可能需要一个小时。我有过一些提示持续了一个小时，我只是一直在运行和—

That’s amazing.

那太棒了。

… and speaking. I highly recommend people try a voice-based-

……以及说话。我强烈推荐人们尝试基于语音的——

So-

那——

… speaking for prolonged periods of time.

……长时间讲话。

I haven’t actually-

我实际上还没有－

As opposed to very specific…

而不是非常具体的…

… I haven’t, yeah, I haven’t used it like that, and maybe that’s how I’m using it wrong. I try to just type or speak two sentences, and then I get a little frustrated that I could’ve typed that just as fast, maybe. But I have not tried this whole thing of just talking continuously for 20 minutes.

… 我没有，是的，我没有那样使用它，也许这就是我使用错误的方式。我试着只打两句话或说两句话，然后我会有点沮丧，觉得我可能打字也一样快。但是我还没有尝试过连续说二十分钟的这种方式。

And especially you because you speak very fast.

尤其是你，因为你说得很快。

Yeah. No, I could see it. I think because the reason I’ve been trying to do it for things like replying to emails, and it got to a point where I thought it could help. And it sort of did, but then it would make a small mistake, and I’d have to correct the mistake. But if you’re doing stream of consciousness to an LLM who doesn’t care about all this other stuff anyway— … that probably works way better.

是的。不，我能理解。我想原因是我一直在尝试用它来处理一些事情，比如回复电子邮件，然后到了某个程度我觉得它可能有帮助。它确实在某种程度上有帮助，但有时会出一个小错误，我得纠正那个错误。但如果你是在对一个不在意其他所有事情的语言模型进行意识流表达——……那可能效果要好得多。

There’s two things you have to do. One, okay, you have the raw audio, transcribes it. I use ElevenLabs for transcription. They’re probably the best speech-to-text model. There’s still mistakes there, so you need to have a prompt that has access to a dictionary and to a lot of—

你必须做两件事。第一，好吧，你有原始音频，把它转录。我用 ElevenLabs 进行转录。他们可能是最好的语音转文本模型。但那里仍然有错误，所以你需要一个可以访问字典和大量资料的提示——

How do you build the dictionary?

你如何构建字典？

First of all, there’s a dictionary of terms that are relevant to you. Then have it aware of… So you have an agent that looks through, when you’re talking about code, looks through your entire code base for key terms that you use often. Also, when we’re talking about messaging, Gmail, and WhatsApp, and so on, it’s aware of all the people and common terms that you get wrong.

首先，有一本与你相关的术语词典。然后让它意识到……所以你有一个代理，当你谈论代码时，它会查看你的整个代码库中你经常使用的关键术语。另外，当我们谈论消息、Gmail 和 WhatsApp 等时，它会了解你所有的联系人和你常用的易错词语。

You’ve really gone deep in this.

你在这方面真的深入了。

That, to me, is a problem that needs to be solved-

对我来说，那是一个需要解决的问题——

Yes.

是的。

… because one of the issues you probably have with speech-to-text is that it makes mistakes sometimes.

……因为你可能在使用语音转文字时遇到的问题之一是它有时会出错。

Correct. Then I can’t use it for dictating an email.

正确。那我就不能用它来听写电子邮件了。

Right. If it never makes mistakes, you-

对。如果它从不犯错，你——

Then it would be more appealing.

那样会更有吸引力。

Yeah, and you are okay being not perfectly real time, actually. You’re okay waiting five seconds-

是的，其实你也可以接受不是完全实时的情况。你可以接受等待五秒钟——

Right.

对。

… potentially. I don’t know what your use case is. I’m okay waiting five seconds- … 10 seconds for it to process everything.

……可能吧。我不知道你的使用情况。我可以接受等待五秒——……十秒让它处理所有东西。

You gotta vibe code this into an app that does all of this such that-

你得把这个风格代码编成一个应用程序，这个应用程序能做到所有这些，以便—

Right.

对。

… it just works.

……它就是能用。

I think I mentioned to you offline that it’s very surprising to me that translation is not done perfectly.

我想我在私下里和你提到过，对我来说，翻译没有做到完美这一点非常令人惊讶。

Right.

对。

Speech-to-speech translation.

语音到语音翻译。

It seems like you’ve gotten much closer to the best of what’s possible by putting all these things together.

把所有这些事情结合在一起之后，你似乎已经非常接近可能达到的最佳状态了。

But, you know, when you’re shipping that kind of stuff, you do have to start thinking about latency.

但是，你知道，当你在运输那种东西时，你确实必须开始考虑延迟问题。

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of good. I mean, if you’re suddenly enabling something people wouldn’t be doing before at all, it’s okay to take five seconds longer. I think this is one of the areas that Steve Jobs was so good, that he realized, like, the first iPhone was terrible in all sorts of ways, right? Absolutely horrendously slow data connection, very underpowered, all the things. But the product was so compelling that it just didn’t matter. You’d be shipping too late if you waited until everything was just right, just perfect. If you’re solving a problem that people currently don’t have a solution for, they’re willing to give it five seconds. If you’re in a competitive market, yeah, okay, it’s different. But that means the problem’s already solved, and you don’t need to solve it.

不要让完美成为好的敌人。我的意思是，如果你突然启用了人们以前根本不会做的事情，多花五秒钟也没关系。我认为这是史蒂夫·乔布斯非常擅长的一个领域，他意识到，第一代 iPhone 在各方面都很糟糕，对吧？数据连接非常慢，性能很差，各种问题。但产品非常吸引人，以至于这些都不重要。如果你等到一切都完全完美再发布，那就太晚了。如果你在解决人们目前没有解决方案的问题，他们愿意多给五秒钟的时间。 如果你处在一个竞争激烈的市场，是的，好吧，那就不同了。但这意味着问题已经解决了，你不需要去解决它。

Mm-hmm. Well, I do think there’s a few… So, like, Whisper flow is really good. A few people have stepped up that speech-to-text thing.

嗯嗯。嗯，我确实认为有几个……所以，比如说，Whisper 流程真的很好。有几个人在语音转文字方面做得很出色。

Yeah. Yeah, we’re using VoxType.

是的。是的，我们正在使用 VoxType。

VoxType?

VoxType？

But others have-

但是其他人有——

VoxType is open source?

VoxType 是开源的吗？

It is. It’s just using one of the open models. I forget which parrot model it’s using or something like that. It works quite well for short commands, so I have used it for that. I think you just hold down F9- … and it starts a dictation.

是的。它只是使用了一个开放模型。我忘了它使用的是哪一个鹦鹉模型之类的。对于简短的指令，它运行得相当好，所以我就用它来做这个。我觉得你只要按住 F9- …… 它就开始语音输入。

Oh, so it’s already in there?

哦，所以它已经在那里了？

You just have to get online. It’ll offer you to install- … the VoxType package. Because the VoxType package includes a model that’s 150 megabytes, and I was like, “Ah.” “I don’t know if I can carry that.” So- … we don’t have that in there by default, but we have the option set up. And I actually just yesterday was thinking we really need to combine all of these things. So Omarchy Quattro is truly amazing as a malleable operating system where you can add functionality to it just by talking to your agent. But that’s exactly what we should be doing. There’s a lot of people who would find it very natural just to talk to their computer and say, “Hey, can you make me a stock panel? I wanna track Apple and Dell,” and just see the agent go off through, entirely through voice, both in terms of the input and in terms of the output, and then your operating system just changes. This was the vision of Iron Man and Jarvis and- … bespoke applications that just appear magically. I’m thinking the area of AI I find truly intriguing are these live gaming models, I don’t know if you’ve seen that, where the AI’s inventing literally the next frame, but you can actually play the game. And I think if they’re able to do that, why can’t we do that with our operating system? Why can’t we just talk to it and ask it to be a different way or change, and it’ll all just change? I think this, by the way, is one of the other breakthroughs that is going to lead to the total domination of Linux. The agents have taken all the hardship out of diagnosing Linux systems and turned the fact that Linux produces these overly specific, totally arcane error messages into its greatest advantage. When Linux has an issue, the agent can take that very specific error message that makes no sense to a normal human and correlate it with the fact that the agent was pre-trained on 40 million lines of Linux code, so it knows exactly where to look and dial it down. I have not had a single problem on my Linux machine since the beginning of this year that an agent could not diagnose. That was not true a year and a half ago. A year and a half ago, I was still searching on forums- … to find answers to esoteric questions. Now the agents know the source code of not just the Linux operating system, but every single piece of software I have on that box. The agent has access to the source code of all of it. In fact, this was one thing I built in just before we shipped. So once you set up your default agent- … Omarchy Quattro has a crash watcher. If any app on your machine crashes, it’ll pop up a little thing, ask you whether you want your AI to diagnose the problem.

你只需要上网。它会提示你安装……VoxType 软件包。因为 VoxType 软件包包含一个 150 兆的模型，我当时就想，“啊。” “我不知道我能不能承受得了。” 所以……我们默认没有把它放在里面，但我们已经设置了这个选项。而事实上，昨天我还在想着我们真的需要把所有这些东西结合起来。所以 Omarchy Quattro 作为一个可塑的操作系统真的很棒，你可以仅通过与代理对话就为它增加功能。 但这正是我们应该做的。有很多人会觉得很自然地跟他们的电脑说话，比如，“嘿，你能帮我做一个股票面板吗？我想跟踪苹果和戴尔，”然后看到智能助理完全通过语音去处理，无论是输入还是输出，然后你的操作系统就会改变。这就是《钢铁侠》和贾维斯的愿景，以及—— ……那些仿佛凭空出现的定制应用。我觉得人工智能中真正让我感兴趣的领域是这些实时游戏模型，不知道你是否见过，就是 AI 在实时生成下一帧，但你实际上可以玩这个游戏。我觉得，如果它们能做到这一点，为什么我们不能在操作系统上也做到呢？为什么我们不能跟它对话，要求它以不同方式运行或做出改变，而它就会完全改变？顺便说一下，我认为这是将导致 Linux 全面统治的另一个突破。智能代理已经消除了诊断 Linux 系统的所有困难，并且将 Linux 那些过于具体、完全神秘的错误信息转化成了其最大的优势。 当 Linux 出现问题时，代理可以将那个对普通人毫无意义的非常具体的错误信息，与代理在 4000 万行 Linux 代码上预训练的事实相关联，因此它确切地知道该从哪里查找并进行处理。今年年初以来，我的 Linux 机器上没有遇到过任何一个代理无法诊断的问题。一年半前情况可不是这样。一年半前，我仍然在论坛上搜索……以寻找晦涩问题的答案。 现在这些代理不仅了解 Linux 操作系统的源代码，还了解我在那台机器上所有软件的源代码。代理可以访问所有这些源代码。事实上，这是我在出货前刚刚实现的一件事。所以一旦你设置好默认代理……Omarchy Quattro 有一个崩溃监视器。如果你机器上的任何应用程序崩溃，它会弹出一个小窗口，询问你是否希望你的 AI 来诊断问题。

Yeah. That’s amazing.

是啊。那太棒了。

Unbelievable. I’ve seen things where there’s an error in some subsystem. Some… Not even Linux, just some app I installed. The agents start digging through the logs and look up systemd log. Then it checks out the damn source code. Of the application that crashed, pins down that it’s in this Rust file line 472 that there’s an unbounded, unwrapped variable that overflowed or whatever it is. Then offers you whether you wanna file a bug report with all this detail. I’ll give you one amazing anecdote. So I was working with this guy JDX, who’s working on mise. This, this package manager for fast-moving development tools. This is how we manage all the agent software and so forth. Normal package managers are not built to be updated seven times a day. And all of these agent harnesses are updated about seven times a day, so we needed an out-of-band package manager, and mise just turns out to be perfect for this. Anyway, it had a small bug. There was some race condition which agents are very good at finding because when you start running multiple agents at the same time, they will suss out all these race conditions you have in your underlying infrastructure that was never triggered by a human trying to do manual thing. So it finds this issue, right? I tell the agent, “Hey can you post this as a bug report to, to JDX’s GitHub?” And unfortunately, right before that, I had had to do a QA run on Omarchy itself with eight different agents. It had found 28 real issues- … that it needed to file. Well, it went to GitHub and tried to file all 28 issues at the same time, which it did in about I don’t know, 12 seconds. GitHub, not unreasonably, marked that as probable spam and banned- … my Omarchy bot. And then I couldn’t do that. So I was blocked from the bot having access to GitHub, so I just told it, “Hey, do you know what? Just email JDX. Here’s his email address.” I had already set it up with hey.com- … an email address. We have a CLI that’s in beta right now. So I set it up with that so it can send to email. That’s how it gives me reports about outstanding issues and, and PR. So it sends JDX this email about the bug it found, and he was like, “Wait, this is the first time I’ve gotten a bug report in unreleased software.” Because it had downloaded the source code to mise, saw that he had already fixed the bug, but that it would not fix the problem entirely in software they had not shipped yet. Pinpointed the problem, and he was like, “Damn it- … I got a bug report before we even cut a release.”

难以置信。我见过有些子系统出错的情况。有些……甚至不是 Linux，只是我安装的某个应用程序。代理会开始挖掘日志，并查找 systemd 日志。然后它会检查该应用程序崩溃的源代码，确定是在这个 Rust 文件的第 472 行，有一个未限定、未封装的变量溢出什么的。然后它会问你是否想要提交一个包含所有这些细节的错误报告。我给你讲一个很棒的轶事。我当时正在和一个叫 JDX 的人一起工作，他在开发 mise，这个用于快速开发工具的包管理器。我们用它来管理所有代理软件等等。普通的包管理器并不是设计来一天更新七次的。 而且所有这些代理程序的版本每天大约更新七次，所以我们需要一个带外包管理器，而 mise 刚好非常适合这个。无论如何，它有一个小错误。存在一些竞态条件，而代理程序非常擅长发现这些问题，因为当你同时运行多个代理时，它们会发现你底层基础设施中所有这些从未被人工触发过的竞态条件。所以它发现了这个问题，对吧？我告诉代理：“嘿，你能把这个作为 bug 报告发布到 JDX 的 GitHub 吗？” 不幸的是，就在那之前，我不得不在 Omarchy 本身上进行一次 QA 测试，使用了八个不同的代理。它发现了 28 个真实问题— ……它需要提交的文件。好吧，它去了 GitHub 并尝试一次性提交全部 28 个问题，大约用了我也不知道，大概 12 秒左右。GitHub，不无道理地，把这标记为可能的垃圾信息并封禁了……我的 Omarchy 机器人。然后我就无法再那样做了。所以我被阻止让机器人访问 GitHub，于是我就跟它说：“嘿，你知道吗？直接发邮件给 JDX 吧。这是他的邮箱地址。”我之前已经在 hey.com 设置好了……一个邮箱地址。我们有一个 CLI，目前处于测试阶段。 所以我用那个设置了它，这样它就可以发送邮件。这就是它如何给我关于未解决的问题和 PR 的报告的方式。所以它给 JDX 发送了关于发现的漏洞的这封邮件，他当时说，“等等，这是我第一次在未发布的软件中收到漏洞报告。” 因为它已经下载了 Mise 的源码，看到他已经修复了漏洞，但这并不能完全解决他们还未发布的软件中的问题。准确找出了问题，然后他说，“该死的……我在我们甚至还没发布版本之前就收到了一个漏洞报告。”

That’s amazing.

那太棒了。

Un-

未

That’s amazing

太棒了

… believable AGI levels of mind-blowing stuff.

……令人难以置信的 AGI 级别的惊人事物。

And that was actually, y- if you remember, that was, that was an open question whether AI systems could debug well. That, that was kinda the, the, the thought that, yeah, sure, they can write code, but can they find issues and-

实际上，如果你还记得，那时这是一个开放性的问题，即人工智能系统是否能够很好地调试。那，当时的想法是，嗯，当然，它们可以写代码，但它们能发现问题吗，以及——

They are so incredibly good at this, and this is actually interesting because I was on the perhaps same side of that, a little skeptical about can it reason about all these things. And Mikhail, who’s the CTO at Shopify, ran a scientific study on this. They had… And this was, I think, late last year or early this year, where he had agents go back through all the incidents, both outages and other problems that Shopify had had in production, trace that back to the PR that was merged, and find out whether PRs that had been reviewed by human or PRs that had been reviewed by agents were of higher quality. Well, lo and surprise- … the PRs that have been reviewed by agents caused all fewer issues in production. And this was with models we had six months ago. At this point, 100% in the majority of domains we work in today, agents are better at finding bugs.

他们在这方面实在是太厉害了，这实际上很有趣，因为我可能曾持类似的观点，有点怀疑它是否能推理出所有这些事情。而 Mikhail，他是 Shopify 的首席技术官，做了一个科学研究。他们……我记得这是去年年底或今年年初，他让代理回顾了所有的事件，包括生产中的故障和其他问题，追溯到合并的 PR，并找出那些由人工审核的 PR 和由代理审核的 PR 哪些质量更高。嗯，结果令人意外—— ……那些由代理审查的 PR 在生产中导致的问题更少。而这是使用我们六个月前的模型时的情况。到目前为止，在我们今天工作的大多数领域，代理在发现漏洞方面更为出色。

So you now run agents all day. What stands out to you as the better model? Who’s currently winning? It seems to be changing constantly. Sol, Fable, Grok 4.6, Gemini, the Chinese OpenWay models.

所以你现在整天运行代理。对你来说哪个模型更出色？目前谁处于领先？似乎情况在不断变化。Sol、Fable、Grok 4.6、Gemini，中国的 OpenWay 模型。

What’s amazing to me is that you could rattle off so many different contenders. That this market is so wide open, that it does actually change back and forth, that we have real competition, that there are so many labs that are able to get either to the frontier or close to it. That, by the way, is remarkable. I still don’t fully understand that. But to answer your question, the best model in general right now is Fable. The second-best model, in my opinion, is Opus 5. But the tier just below Opus 5, and it’s not even that they’re always below, sometimes they’re ahead. I’ll get to that in a second. I would rank GPT Sol as very good. Grok 4.6 I just started testing a few days ago. I had this wonderful test that I’ve set up by accident where I translated this Python library into Rust. The screensaver you just saw with all the cool animation?

让我感到惊讶的是，你竟然能列出这么多不同的竞争者。这个市场如此开放，它确实会来回变化，我们有真正的竞争，还有这么多实验室能够达到前沿或者接近前沿。顺便说一句，这很了不起。我仍然不能完全理解这一点。但回答你的问题，目前总体上最好的模型是 Fable。我认为第二好的模型是 Opus 5。但在 Opus 5 之下的那个等级，并不是说它们总是落后，有时它们甚至领先。我稍后会谈到这一点。我会把 GPT Sol 排为非常好。 Grok 4.6 我几天前才开始测试。我偶然设置了一个很棒的测试，我把这个 Python 库翻译成了 Rust。你刚刚看到的带有所有酷炫动画的屏幕保护程序？

Yep.

嗯。

That’s powered by a Python library called Terminal Text Effects. Really cool library. We’ve been using it since the first day of Omarchy. The problem with that is it’s written in Python, so when it starts up, especially on a laptop, and it runs in Python, it uses all of your CPU to do these effects, and therefore, it means it uses about 30 watts of energy, and it spins up your fans, and it drains your battery. Doesn’t really matter on a local computer, but it does matter on a laptop. So I thought, “Do you know what? This sounds like a problem for Rust.” So first I gave Fable the challenge, and all I told it was, “Here’s the source code for the Python library,” this TTE library that had a bunch of dependencies and so forth. “I want a Rust version of this with no dependencies, a single executable.” Like, that’s what Rust does. So basically, I want it in Rust. I want it to be pixel perfect, frame by frame, do a full analysis, don’t stop until you’re finished.

这是由一个名为 Terminal Text Effects 的 Python 库驱动的。真的很酷的库。自 Omarchy 的第一天起，我们就一直在使用它。问题是它是用 Python 编写的，所以当它启动时，尤其是在笔记本电脑上，而且它运行在 Python 中时，它会使用你所有的 CPU 来实现这些效果，因此意味着它大约消耗 30 瓦的能量，并且会启动风扇，同时耗尽你的电池。 在本地电脑上其实无所谓，但在笔记本上就很重要。所以我想，‘你知道吗？这听起来像是 Rust 的问题。’于是我先给 Fable 提出了挑战，我只告诉它，‘这是 Python 库的源代码，’这个 TTE 库有一大堆依赖等等。‘我想要一个没有依赖的 Rust 版本，一个单独的可执行文件。’就是这样，Rust 就是干这个的。所以基本上，我想要它用 Rust 写。我希望它像素级完美，一帧一帧地做完整分析，直到完成为止。

Yep.

嗯。

That was the prompt.

那就是提示。

Yep.

嗯。

I kid you not, in just under 45 minutes, it was like Am I heard all?

我不是开玩笑，不到 45 分钟，就像是‘我把所有的话都听到了吗？’

Yeah.

是的。

I’m finished. I’ve checked everything. I have reduced the startup time from 86 milliseconds to two milliseconds. I have sped up the execution time by 9.6 times, I believe it was. The executable is three megabytes. Do you wanna run it?

我完成了。我已经检查了一切。我已将启动时间从 86 毫秒减少到两毫秒。我相信我已经将执行时间加快了 9.6 倍。可执行文件是三兆字节。你想运行它吗？

That’s awesome.

那太棒了。

So I run it—

所以我运行它——

Oh, man.

哦，天啊。

… and I don’t know why I’m surprised, because this translation job is something we’ve known for a while that AI is pretty good at, but it was still staggering to me that I could one-shot a full translation of a Python library I had been using for a year, that others had been using for much longer, and turn it into a Rust executable without knowing any Rust, without looking at the Rust code at all, and produce this executable that I then told the agent right after, “This is great. Ship it.” It packaged it up as a new package. It told me, “What do you want it to call?” “Uh, let’s call it TTFX. Let’s create a new Git repo.” It sets up the Git repo. “Let’s create a new package, build package for our build system.” It puts that up. “Let’s push it out. Let’s open the pull request to the Omarchy itself so we switch around from TTE, the Python implementation, to TTFX.” It does all of it, and I’m just sitting there. And again, I’m already at this point fully delirious with agent acceleration, and I still had to lean back and I go like, “This is AGI, isn’t it? This is what AGI looks like. If we have… If these moments are just what it is all the time, this is AGI.”

……我也不知道为什么会感到惊讶，因为这份翻译工作我们早就知道 AI 做得相当不错，但让我震惊的是，我竟然可以一次性将我使用了一年的 Python 库的完整翻译完成，其他人可能使用它的时间更长，然后将其变成一个 Rust 可执行文件，而我一点 Rust 也不会，根本没看过 Rust 代码，而且还生成了这个可执行文件，然后我立刻对代理说：“太棒了，上线吧。”它将其打包成一个新包。它问我，“你想叫它什么名字？”“呃，就叫 TTFX 吧。创建一个新的 Git 仓库。”它设置好了 Git 仓库。“创建一个新包，为我们的构建系统构建包。”它完成了。“把它发布出去。” “让我们向 Omarchy 本身发起拉取请求，这样我们就可以从 TTE（Python 实现）切换到 TTFX。” 它全都做了，而我只是坐在那里。同样，我在这一点上已经完全因代理加速而精神错乱了，但我仍然不得不后靠着身体，然后说，“这就是 AGI，不是吗？这就是 AGI 的样子。如果我们……如果这些时刻就是它一直的状态，这就是 AGI。”

Now, as I understand, you also repeated the same experiment not just with Fable.

现在，据我了解，你不仅对《寓言》重复了同样的实验。

I did it on all the models. First, I did it… Actually, funny thing. So I ran out of Fable tokens about two-thirds through, and it just automatically switched over to Opus 5 and kept going and finished the job. Part of the reason why I think it was able to do that was that the first thing Fable did was create a plan, and it was a really detailed plan. I think it had eight separate steps of, “Here you do it, and here, how you analyze it, and here you run the effects,” and so on. I didn’t review the plan at all. I didn’t change the plan. It just made the plan so Opus could take over. And then I thought, “Well, if Opus can finish the job, maybe some of the other agents could finish it, too.” So the first thing I did was I gave it to… I think I gave it to Sol. And Sol finished the job, too. It took twice as long, so it took, I think, about an hour and a half. But here’s the kicker. The per token cost, I didn’t pay per token. I have a max subscription to Claude, right? So it did it within the subscription. It used all my tokens, so I had to switch over to Opus 5. But if I had paid per token, it would’ve been 550 bucks, I think, to do the whole thing. And I thought for a second, “Holy shit. What a steal.” If I personally had to learn Rust well enough to be able to do this translation, I’m looking at a nine-month job here. I can pay 500 bucks to have this translation happen, and suddenly I get a 10x execution speed up. This is… I would totally pay 500 bucks for this. But competition. So I give it to Sol. Same plan. To be fair, I didn’t ask Sol to do the plan. I just took the Fable plan, gave it to Sol. Sol, in an hour and a half, and I think $46 worth of tokens, repeated the task. Did the same thing. And I thought, “Well, blimey, that’s amazing.” Then I got greedy. So I asked GPT Luna, which is this crazy cheap model that OpenAI has as well, “Can you do it?” Absolutely not. First of all, it didn’t even wanna start the task. I think something happened—I don’t know, I think it was in the spring—where we didn’t need these slash goal things anymore. The agents could just automatically keep going in a loop if you told it not to stop- … and so forth. So Sol could do that. Fable could do that. But Luna couldn’t. So I had… I think I did 12 prompts. Kept telling it to do it, and eventually I sort of got it started. The first thing it did was to cheat. So the first thing, it looked outside its own directory, saw that there was already another implementation, and just did a short wrapper around that and said, “I’m done.” Hilarious. But it couldn’t finish because it made just a couple things. But I mean, okay, so it can’t do that. Then I gave it to Grok-

我对所有模型都做了。首先，我做了……其实，有件有趣的事。我在大约完成三分之二时用完了 Fable 代币，然后它就自动切换到 Opus 5 并继续运行，完成了任务。我认为它能够做到这一点的部分原因是 Fable 做的第一件事是制定了一个计划，而且是一个非常详细的计划。我记得它有八个独立的步骤，比如“这里你做这个，这里你分析这个，这里你运行效果”等等。我完全没有审查计划，也没有修改计划。它就直接制定了计划，让 Opus 可以接手。然后我想，“如果 Opus 可以完成任务，也许其他一些代理也能完成。”所以我做的第一件事是把它交给……我记得我把它交给了 Sol。 索尔也完成了这项工作。花了两倍的时间，所以我想大概用了一个半小时。但关键来了。按每个 token 的费用，我并没有按 token 支付。我有 Claude 的最高级订阅，对吧？所以它是在订阅范围内完成的。它用完了我所有的 token，所以我不得不切换到 Opus 5。但如果我按 token 支付的话，完成整个任务大概要花 550 美元。我当时差点就想，“天啊，真划算。”如果我自己要学够 Rust 来完成这个翻译，我估计得花九个月的时间。我可以花 500 美元让这个翻译完成，然后突然获得十倍的执行速度提升。这是……我完全愿意为此支付 500 美元。 但是竞争。我把它给了 Sol。计划一样。公平地说，我并没有要求 Sol 制定计划。我只是拿了 Fable 的计划，交给了 Sol。Sol 在一个半小时内，我想花了大约 46 美元的代币，重复了这个任务。做了同样的事情。我当时想，“哇，真是太棒了。”然后我变得贪心了。所以我问了 GPT Luna，这是 OpenAI 的一个超级便宜的模型，“你能做到吗？”绝对不行。首先，它甚至不想开始这个任务。我想可能发生了什么——我不知道，我觉得是在春季——我们不再需要这些斜杠目标了。如果你告诉代理不要停止，它们就可以自动循环继续执行任务。 ……诸如此类。所以 Sol 可以做到。Fable 可以做到。但 Luna 做不到。所以我……我想我做了 12 个提示。不断让它去做，最终我才有点让它开始。它做的第一件事就是作弊。所以第一件事，它看了看自己目录之外的东西，看到已经有另一个实现，然后只是围绕那个做了一个简短的包装器，然后说：“我完成了。”太搞笑了。但它不能完成，因为它只做了几件事。但我的意思是，好吧，它做不到。然后我把它给了 Grok——

Mm.

嗯。

… 46. And I had used Grok 45 a little bit, and I thought like, “Ah, I mean, it’s cool that there’s others trying, but, like, I’m not gonna use it,” because it felt quite far behind. Grok 46 fucking completes the task. 10x speed up, same size executable. $55 Worth of per token cost, I think it was. Absolutely unbelievable. Then I repeated, too, with Kimi K3- … which took forever. I forget how long Kimi actually spent on it. And then I also did it with DeepSeek V4 Flash first. And Flash failed the same way that Luna did. It couldn’t do it. And then I did it with Pro, and Pro also completed the task. It took 2 hours 45, $23. So here we are, right? Like, Fable, clearly the best. It was the fastest. It was the one that wrote the plan, but 550 bucks, and the output the same. The others, Sol, Grok, about the same, 1/10 the cost. DeepSeek, 1/20 the cost, but you have to wait a little longer. Absolutely gobsmackingly incredible. And now, by the way, so I had Fable finish the first job, and then Opus finished it. That was the first one shot, right? It’s 10 times faster. I did two auto research runs, which isn’t even auto research anymore. You don’t have to do the slash. You just tell it to keep going until you tell it to stop. It ended up… I think we ended up with a 46-time execution improvement over the original.

…46。我之前用过一点 Grok 45，然后我想，“啊，我是说，有其他人在尝试也很酷，但是，我不会用它，”因为感觉它远远落后。Grok 46 他妈的完成了任务。速度提升了 10 倍，执行文件大小相同。每个令牌成本 55 美元，我记得是这样。简直难以置信。然后我也重复用了 Kimi K3- … 结果花了很久。我忘了 Kimi 到底花了多长时间。然后我还先用 DeepSeek V4 Flash 做了一次。Flash 和 Luna 一样失败了。它做不到。然后我用 Pro 做了，Pro 也完成了任务。用了 2 小时 45 分钟，花费 23 美元。所以情况就是这样，对吧？Fable，显然是最棒的。它是最快的。它写出了计划，但要 550 美元，而且输出相同。 其他的，Sol、Grok，大致相同，花费是原来的 1/10。DeepSeek，花费是原来的 1/20，但你需要等久一点。绝对令人震惊的不可思议。顺便说一下，我让 Fable 完成了第一个任务，然后 Opus 完成了它。那是第一个一次性完成的，对吧？它快了十倍。我做了两次自动研究，这甚至已经不是自动研究了。你不需要做斜杠操作。你只需告诉它继续，直到你叫停。最后……我认为我们最终比原来提高了 46 倍的执行效率。

It’s incredible.

难以置信。

Absolutely incredible.

绝对令人难以置信。

It’s just incredible. I do, you know, I just don’t think there’s anything that compares to Fable in terms of planning. So I usually do Fable for planning and for reviewing and then something else for implementation, like Opus 5. And it’s really nice. It’s a really nice setup that allows you to not run out of tokens too much.

这真是不可思议。我是说，你知道的，我只是觉得在规划方面，没有什么能比得上 Fable。所以我通常用 Fable 来进行规划和复盘，然后在实施方面用其他工具，比如 Opus 5。这真的很好。这是一个非常好的设置，可以让你不至于太快用完 token。

What I found, it’s really interesting because Fable is, in my opinion, the best model right now, but it also makes mistakes. And the best way to get the best software, I would actually rather have two differently sourced sort of… I mean, they’re not mid-tier, they’re all frontier. But have, let’s say Opus 5 and Codex- … and have one check the other’s job. This is my standard operating procedure now. I’ll have a Opus or Fable do the work, and then I always end it, review with Codex xHigh. And I’ve also started using Grok just to test it out, and it’s also quite good. And it keeps finding stuff. And then that’s my workflow when I’m having my agents on my own machine do it, and then I push to GitHub. And then Copilot, I kid you not, has actually gotten good. Copilot keeps finding stuff that’s legitimately broken, which is also incredible acceleration because the first version of Copilot that started doing this was literally retarded. It would just constantly flag things that were nonsense. It would constantly flag the same problem over and over again as you would push. It was really annoying, so I think a lot of people actually ended up turning that off. And if they did, they should turn it back on because it’s actually quite good. Keeps finding things. And if you then take that, and we shouldn’t be surprised. Why are we surprised? Even if you’re a good programmer, if you finish a job and you ask your also very good peer to review it, you’re gonna end up with better code. Of course you’re gonna end up with better code. So build that into your process. Pick one of the agents to drive with. I’ve mainly been driving with Claude, which is actually interesting because I have some other reservations about Anthropic. But the reason I’m sticking with Claude is, in my opinion, they actually have the best harness. And one of the reasons it’s the best harness is it’s multi-agent running. So if you wanna run multiple agents at the same time, you can do arrow left when you’re inside a session, then it goes back to Agent View. And here in Agent View, you can pick up another agent. So if you wanna do this thing where you have multiple threads going on- … Claude Code is just the nicest setup. They also just, they keep being a little further ahead, which probably shouldn’t be surprising. I mean, Boris, one of the guys that’s working on that, he was the first one and basically came up with the thing. It’s just interesting that that has been an enduring advantage. I’ve also used OpenCode a lot. I think OpenCode is great. I use OpenCode mainly as my main harness for all the open models, so Kimi K3 and so forth. And I inference not on the Chinese servers. So I inference on Fireworks- … which is a really nice service where you can just pay by the token, and if you’re using these open weight models, they’re not that expensive by token. So that’s a great way to do that. But I don’t think I would be using… Well, maybe I would. But if… Using Claude with a subscription does feel like a bargain, like a crazy bargain.

我发现这真的很有趣，因为在我看来，Fable 目前是最好的模型，但它也会犯错误。而获得最佳软件的最佳方式，我实际上更愿意使用两种不同来源的……我的意思是，它们都不是中端的，都是前沿的。但比如说，可以有 Opus 5 和 Codex-……让其中一个检查另一个的工作。这现在是我的标准操作程序。我会让 Opus 或 Fable 完成工作，然后我总是用 Codex xHigh 进行最终审核。 我也开始使用 Grok 来测试一下，它也相当不错。而且它不断发现问题。这就是当我让我的代理在我自己的机器上运行时的工作流程，然后我再推送到 GitHub。说真的，Copilot 现在确实变好了。Copilot 不断发现真正存在的错误，这也是惊人的加速，因为最初版本的 Copilot 根本不行。它会不断标记一些无意义的东西，而且你每次推送都会重复标记同样的问题，非常烦人，所以我想很多人最终都把它关闭了。如果他们关闭了，应该重新打开，因为它现在真的挺好的。 不断地发现问题。如果你接着解决这些问题，我们也不应该感到惊讶。为什么会感到惊讶呢？即使你是一个优秀的程序员，如果你完成了一项工作，然后请同样非常优秀的同事进行审查，你最终的代码会更好。当然，你最终会有更好的代码。所以要把这点融入你的流程中。选择一个代理来主导。我主要一直在用 Claude 驱动，这实际上很有趣，因为我对 Anthropic 还有一些保留意见。但我之所以坚持使用 Claude，是因为在我看来，他们实际上有最好的框架。而它之所以是最好的框架，其中一个原因是它支持多代理运行。所以如果你想同时运行多个代理，当你在会话中时可以按左箭头，然后它会回到代理视图。 在代理视图中，你可以选择另一个代理。所以如果你想做那种同时进行多个线程的事情……Claude Code 是最好的设置。他们也总是领先一点，这可能并不令人惊讶。我的意思是，Boris，是参与那个项目的一个人，他是第一个基本上想出这个东西的人。有趣的是，这一直是一个持久的优势。我也经常使用 OpenCode。我认为 OpenCode 很棒。我主要使用 OpenCode 作为所有开源模型的主要框架，比如 Kimi K3 等。我不是在中国的服务器上进行推理。我是在 Fireworks 上进行推理的—— ……这是一个非常好的服务，你可以按代币支付，如果你使用这些开放权重模型，它们按代币计算也不贵。所以这是一个很好的方式来使用它。不过我觉得我可能不会使用……嗯，也许我会。但是如果……用订阅方式使用 Claude 确实感觉很划算，像是一个疯狂的划算。

Yeah, I knew. And I actually have four.

是的，我知道。实际上我有四个。

I just signed up for my second one this morning- … because I got up at 4:00 with jet lag, and I started working with the agents right away, and now I’m three days away from limits resetting on Fable, and I ran out of tokens.

我今天早上刚报名参加了第二次……因为我因为时差早上四点就起床了，然后我立刻开始和代理工作，现在距离《Fable》限额重置还有三天，而我的代币已经用完了。

So, and they should really-

所以，他们真的应该—

I mean, I don’t… Why is that so complicated? Can’t you just stack one subscription? Why do I need to log in multiple times?

我的意思是，我不…为什么这么复杂？你不能只叠加一个订阅吗？为什么我需要多次登录？

And obviously you’ll have to develop some kind of tooling-

显然，你还必须开发某种工具——

Yes, I did that too.

是的，我也做了那件事。

… to move from one- … to the other. And then-

… 从一个移动到另一个。然后…

Oh, we’re building that into Omarchy, by the way. So the next version of Omarchy is gonna ship with multi-sub support. I wish that the labs would just make you buy a max 100 times.

哦，顺便说一下，我们正在把这个功能加入 Omarchy。所以下一版本的 Omarchy 将会支持多订阅。我希望实验室只是让你最多购买 100 次。

It’s kind of actually fascinating though for me because there’s… It’s very challenging for me to use Grok 4.6 and then a Claude Code because Grok is so fast.

对我来说这其实有点令人着迷，因为……对我来说使用 Grok 4.6 然后再用 Claude Code 非常有挑战性，因为 Grok 太快了。

Yes. That’s actually the deal. The deal with Grok is that their fast mode is cheaper than the regular mode on the others. And when you’ve used Grok 4.6 on fast, it’s kind of addictive ’cause it almost gets you to this single thread mode- … where the agent is able to keep up with you.

是的。其实情况就是这样。关于 Grok 的情况是，它的快速模式比其他的普通模式更便宜。当你在快速模式下使用 Grok 4.6 时，它会有点上瘾，因为它几乎让你进入这种单线程模式——代理能够跟上你的节奏。

Yeah, but I don’t know how… I can’t… Once I get used to Claude Code I can’t handle the speed of Grok ’cause I’m used to now multitasking.

是的，但我不知道该怎么做……我做不到……一旦我习惯了 Claude Code，我就无法应付 Grok 的速度，因为我现在已经习惯了多任务处理。

Correct.

正确。

And so now I’m back in this-

所以现在我又回到了这个——

Yes.

是的。

… anxious mode of, switching.

……焦虑的切换模式。

Yeah. No, I agree.

是的。不，我同意。

… switching. So I mean, all of this is a learning process of what programming actually is supposed to look like.

…切换。所以我的意思是，这一切都是一个学习过程，了解编程实际上应该是什么样子的。

By the way, one of the reasons why I’m not sure what the final form of these harnesses is gonna take, because one of the things we’ve started experimenting with at Basecamp is that we put the agents inside of Basecamp, and we treat them as coworkers.

顺便说一下，我不确定这些挂具最终会是什么样子的原因之一，是因为我们在 Basecamp 开始尝试的一件事是，我们把代理放在 Basecamp 内部，并把他们当作同事对待。

Yeah. That’s awesome.

是啊。那太棒了。

And then we assign them tasks-

然后我们给他们分配任务——

That’s awesome.

那太棒了。

… inside of Basecamp, so they will do work on a to-do in Basecamp, or they’ll work, do work on a card. And it turns out that a collaboration tool that’s optimized for asynchronous communication is actually the right format versus these harnesses are a little more like chat. And chat, which was, I mean, the original format for these things, is not the right thing because you’re sitting around waiting. It entices you to sit around and wait, versus when you’re dealing with something like Basecamp and you can just give an agent a to-do item, you don’t expect to hear back immediately. So I don’t know what the final form is gonna take, but I’ve been using all of the harnesses. So I use them inside of Herdr, and Herdr has panes. So oftentimes I’ll run Claude up top, and then I’ll run Codex down below, and then maybe I also have an OpenCode set up. But I will say just very recently, I found that the human in the loop is the limit here. So I’ve started setting up more automated systems. I’ve been building an Oma bot that can do more autonomous development on Omarchy that is just on a regular schedule process, all depending to do or PRs and issues, and then send me an email using the HEY CLI, and then I just get this email. Here’s 12 PRs that are either ready to go or I think you should close. And then I just make the final determination there.

……在 Basecamp 里面，所以他们会在 Basecamp 里处理待办事项，或者在卡片上处理工作。事实证明，一个针对异步沟通优化的协作工具实际上才是正确的形式，而这些测试工具更像是聊天。而聊天，嗯，我的意思是，这些东西最初的形式，并不是正确的方式，因为你会坐在那里等待。这会诱使你坐在那里等待，而使用 Basecamp 这样的平台时，你只需给代理一个待办事项，你并不指望立即收到回复。所以我不知道最终的形式会是什么样，但我一直在使用所有这些测试工具。我在 Herdr 里使用它们，而 Herdr 有窗格。 所以很多时候，我会让 Claude 在上层运行，然后让我让 Codex 在下层运行，然后也许我还会设置一个 OpenCode。但我必须说，就在最近，我发现这里的限制是人类在循环中。因此，我开始建立更多自动化系统。我一直在构建一个 Oma 机器人，可以在 Omarchy 上进行更自主的开发，这个开发是在一个常规的计划流程中，完全基于待办事项或 PR 和问题，然后使用 HEY CLI 给我发送电子邮件，然后我就收到这封邮件。邮件内容是：这里有 12 个 PR，它们要么已经准备好，要么我认为你应该关闭。然后我就在这里做最终决定。

Do you find the multitasks, the task-switching mentally exhausting?

你觉得多任务处理和任务切换在心理上很累吗？

Yes, but in an exhilarating way. Like, one of the things I always loved about race cars was when I would stumble out of the car absolutely smashed and barely able to hold my head up, and I’d lay down on the garage floor and just think, “Holy fuck, I’m alive.” That’s the kind of exhaustion, mental exhaustion I’m feeling at moments with the agents right now.

是的，但那是一种令人振奋的方式。我一直喜欢赛车的一件事就是，当我从车里跌跌撞撞地出来，完全喝醉，几乎撑不住自己的头，然后躺在车库地板上，只想着，“我的天，我还活着。”这种疲惫感，我现在和这些特工在一起的时候，正是那种精神上的疲惫感。

By the way, when you’re racing, where, what’s the source of the exhaustion? Like-

顺便问一下，当你比赛时，疲惫感来自哪里？比如—

It’s physical. It’s just… I mean, I bet it’s the same thing with jujitsu, right? Like, it’s actually satisfying to feel exhausted. It feels like you’ve applied yourself. And I feel that with the mental exhaustion you can get from agents.

这是身体上的。只是……我是说，我打赌柔术也是一样，对吧？就像，感到筋疲力尽实际上很让人满足。感觉像是你真的付出了努力。而我在处理特工工作时的心理疲惫也有同样的感觉。

Are you also mentally drained from racing?

你也因为赛跑而精神疲惫吗？

Yes. If you drive in difficult conditions, especially if you drive in the rain, where you’re constantly managing the thing right at the knife’s edge. But most of the time, I just enjoyed the physical exhaustion.

是的。如果你在困难条件下驾驶，尤其是在下雨天驾驶，你要不断地把事情控制在危险的边缘。但大多数时候，我只是享受身体上的疲惫感。

And here, with the multitask switching, I do find that, like, I get really exhausted, and I think it’s because I’m thinking a lot. ‘Cause, like, you’re basically-

在这里，随着多任务切换，我确实发现我会感到非常疲惫，我认为这是因为我思考了很多。因为，你基本上——

That’s exactly it.

就是这样。

…there’s no, like passive low energy thinking.

……没有那种消极低能量的思维。

No.

不。

You’re like-

你就像-

There’s no coasting

不能偷懒

… problem.

……问题。

There’s no coasting.

没有偷懒的余地。

Solve problem, next problem, solve problem, and you’re really thinking.

解决问题，下一个问题，解决问题，然后你真的在思考。

It’s funny. It’s actually very similar with racing. There’s some tracks, like Le Mans, where you get time to relax. There’s the Mulsanne straights where it’s kinda long. You’re going fast, but in a straight line, you can take a breath. And then there are other tracks where it’s just coming full on all the time, and you don’t have any moment to relax, and you stumble out of the car after an hour in each, and it’s very different how exhausted you are. And this is exactly what I’m finding with the agents too, that when you’re running at max human capacity- … you’re just constantly in a corner.

很有趣。实际上这和赛车非常相似。有些赛道，比如勒芒，你会有时间放松。有穆尔桑直道，那里的路段相当长。你速度很快，但方向是直的，可以喘口气。然后有些赛道则完全没有停歇，一直全速前进，你没有任何放松的时刻，开一个小时出来时整个人都筋疲力尽，你的疲惫感完全不同。我发现使用人工智能代理时也是一样，当你以人的最大能力在运作时……你只是不断地处在一个拐角里。

Do you think people are in danger of burnout?

你认为人们有精疲力尽的危险吗？

I think the moment we’re in right now is gonna pass. That this need to… It’s not a babysitting motion, but constant interaction with the agents is gonna fade. I’m, from what I’ve seen on Omarchy, I think we can automate a ton of the development and debugging of the system- … to the point where I can just review that email once a day, and then make the decisions once a day. Yep, goes, no, goes, in, out, and whatever. We’re not there yet, but I think we’re gonna get there.

我觉得我们现在所处的这个时刻会过去的。这种需要……这不是照顾孩子的动作，但与代理的持续互动会逐渐减少。根据我在 Omarchy 上看到的情况，我认为我们可以自动化大量系统的开发和调试工作……到那个程度，我每天只需查看一次邮件，然后每天做一次决策。是的，去，不去，进，出，随便什么。我们还没到那个阶段，但我认为我们会到达那里。

Well, can you sort of, like, empathize with the feeling that, say, a young person sitting in San Francisco, everybody around them is not sleeping. They’re obsessed. They’re programming nonstop. And there’s this kinda sense that AGI is gonna be here any minute. There’s, everybody knows somebody who’s made millions of dollars because they sold a startup. And so there’s a kinda feeling like you shouldn’t be sleeping. You should be constantly managing agents and programming and building, and that feels like a moment in time we’ll look back at.

嗯，你能有点……有点像共情的感觉吗，比如说，一个年轻人坐在旧金山，周围的人都不睡觉。他们痴迷于不停地编程。总有一种感觉，AGI 随时可能出现。每个人都认识某个通过出售创业公司赚了上百万的人。所以有一种感觉，你不应该睡觉，你应该不断管理代理、编程和建设，而这感觉就像是一个我们以后会回顾的时刻。

It’s the birth of a new paradigm. It’s always messy.

这是一个新范式的诞生。这总是混乱的。

It’s always messy.

总是很乱。

It’s always exhausting. There’s no other way around that. And by the way, hasn’t San Francisco always been like this? I remember the dotcom boom years, and everyone was just the same, and then it was all mobile, and before that it was the gold rush. So I think that’s probably- … just San Francisco. It attracts- … the kind of individuals-

这总是令人筋疲力尽。别无他法。顺便说一句，旧金山难道不是一直都这样吗？我记得互联网泡沫时期，每个人都是一样的，然后是移动时代，再早就是淘金热。所以我想那可能——…只是旧金山。它吸引了——…那种类型的人。

The dreamers.

梦想家。

… who would think, “I don’t have time to sleep.” I’ve not been on that track, generally speaking, but I will admit that the last three months have felt more exhausting than any other project I’ve done in the last five years, since the Hey launch. That was the last time we had a crazy exhausting launch.

……谁会想，“我没有时间睡觉。”一般来说，我并没有走上那条路，但我必须承认，过去三个月比我在过去五年里做的任何其他项目都感觉更加疲惫，自从 Hey 推出以来。那是我们上一次经历疯狂疲惫的发布的时候。

Do you think you can keep going at this pace?

你认为你能以这个速度继续下去吗？

No, no, no, no, no. This is not sustainable at all.

不，不，不，不，不。这一点都不可持续。

Okay.

好的。

But I also, I can see the end of the tunnel. Because the automation, which by the way, everyone is building. This is so hilarious. Like, everyone is building their little gas town, their little agent coordination, their setup. This is all gonna be solved. We’re not all gonna have to build our own coordination harnesses. Of course we’re not. And in fact, I’m a little surprised that it’s gone this long, that there’s not more of it has been sucked up by the major labs. You’d think that they’d just built this stuff in. But some of it is also this is what a new domain looks like. I remember for a hot moment when JavaScript kind of came to realize its own power, and there was basically a new JavaScript framework every five minutes, right? Like, a lot of churn. This is what happens at the advent of a new paradigm. So I think it’s natural, and I think it’s gonna settle down, and I can already see the light at the end of the tunnel. So I don’t mind a sprint. In fact, I welcome it now. I like this notion that most time is calm, but then occasionally you gotta climb a mountain.

但我也能看到隧道的尽头。 因为自动化，顺便说一下，每个人都在做。这太搞笑了。就像，每个人都在建立他们的小型煤气城，他们的小型代理协调，他们的设置。这一切都会被解决。我们不会都不得不自己建立协调工具。当然不会。事实上，我有点惊讶这件事会持续这么久，没有被主要实验室吸收得更多。你会认为他们会直接把这些东西建立起来。但有些也是，这就是一个新领域的样子。我记得当 JavaScript 一度开始意识到它自己的力量时，基本上每五分钟就会有一个新的 JavaScript 框架，对吧？比如说，很多变动。这就是新范式出现时会发生的事情。 所以我认为这是自然的，我认为它会平息，我已经可以看到隧道尽头的光了。所以我并不介意冲刺。事实上，我现在欢迎它。我喜欢这种观念：大多数时间是平静的，但偶尔你必须爬一座山。

If we look back to the DHH a year ago, what advice would you give to that guy?

如果我们回顾一年前的 DHH，你会给那个人什么建议？

I wouldn’t wanna spoil it.

我不想剧透。

Okay.

好的。

What a thriller that this has been. I mean, if you would’ve scripted this, I’d be like, “This is so far-fetched. Get out of here. Unbelievable,” right? I wouldn’t wanna know anything. The fact that this rollercoaster and this acceleration has been absorbed in real time by everyone, no one knew, right? Like, some had premonitions that were a little better than others, but no one knew, not exactly the way- … it was gonna go and how fast it was gonna take off. I mean, it’s, it’s the show of a lifetime. I mean, the meme cinema- … absolutely applies-

这真是一场惊险刺激的经历。我的意思是，如果你事先写好这个剧本，我会说，‘这也太牵强了吧。走开吧。简直不可思议，’对吗？我一点也不想知道。事实上，这场过山车般的冒险和加速过程被每个人实时经历，没有人知道，对吧？有些人有比别人稍微准确的预感，但没人确切知道会怎样发展，以及会以多快的速度启动。我的意思是，这是一次一生难得的表演。我是说，这种梗电影……绝对适用。

Yeah, it’s incredible.

是的，真不可思议。

… to this moment.

……到这一刻。

That said, what do you think DHH from a year from now will be like? I mean, what are the possible versions?

话虽如此，你认为一年的时间里 DHH 会是什么样子？我的意思是，有哪些可能的版本？

That all our dreams are coming true. Like, this is the AI maximalist abundance argument. That once Elon’s robots have the level of intelligence and AGI that I’m experiencing on some of this development stuff, the world is gonna be so unrecognizably different that we can’t even imagine it. Now, I don’t spend any time thinking about that because I think that is the way to the AI psychosis. So therefore, I just immerse myself in the moment and get absolutely the maximum out of it, and-

我们所有的梦想都在实现。就像，这是人工智能极端主义的丰足论点。一旦埃隆的机器人达到了我在一些开发项目上体验到的智能和通用人工智能水平，世界将会变得如此不同以至于我们无法想象。现在，我不花时间去思考那个，因为我认为那是通向人工智能精神病的道路。因此，我只是沉浸在当下，并从中获得最大的收益，而且——

Just have fun.

尽情享受乐趣。

Just have fun. I mean, I get it why people are finding this exhausting. Just keeping up. Not even using agents, just, like, being like, “What’s the latest model? What tool are we using now? Is it TMox? Is it a Herder? Is it none of it? Is it agents?” Whatever. I get it, but I also again think we should be so blessed. You are alive in this moment where decades are happening- … in weeks.

尽情玩吧。我的意思是，我理解为什么人们会觉得这很累。只是跟上而已。甚至都没有使用代理，只是像“最新的模型是什么？我们现在在用什么工具？是 TMox 吗？是 Herder 吗？还是都不是？是代理吗？”随便什么。我理解，但我也再次认为我们应该感到非常幸运。你活在这样一个时刻，在这里，几十年的发展——……只是几周就发生了。

Quick bathroom break. I’ve been generating a lot of video recently with Higgsfield, and so they became a sponsor. Created a racing video. Wanted to get your opinion on it.

快速去一下洗手间。我最近和 Higgsfield 一起制作了很多视频，所以他们成为了赞助商。制作了一个赛车视频。想听听你的意见。

Oh, yeah? Oh, let me see. Let me see.

哦，是吗？哦，让我看看。让我看看。

To see-

看见

If they downshift on a straight like they do in the movies, I’ll call it out. That is the worst. Let me see.

如果他们像电影里那样在直道上降档，我会指出来。那是最糟糕的。让我看看。

Yeah, see if-

是的，看看是否-

Oh, that’s a real clip

哦，那真是一个精彩片段

… this is fully AI generated. So first it goes-

… 这是完全由人工智能生成的。所以首先是-

Wait, what? This is AI? Shit, that’s my suit. That’s my car.

等等，什么？这是人工智能？糟糕，那是我的西装。那是我的车。

Lights go green on a street that never sleeps.

在一条永不眠的街道上，灯变绿了。

Oh, my God.

哦，我的天啊。

Do an audio-

做一个音频

Are you kidding me?

你在开玩笑吗？

But they never came. Is it good? I got a bad case.

但是他们从未来过。好吗？我得了重病。

I mean, it’s crazy. You really have to notice in the… Like, that car didn’t have headlights on and the other one did. And that looked like a 60-year-old version of me. But holy crap, the… Wow, that was crazy.

我的意思是，这太疯狂了。你真的必须注意到……比如，那辆车没有开大灯，而另一辆车开了大灯。那看起来像是我 60 岁时的样子。但天哪，那……哇，那太疯狂了。

So there’s parallels here to programming because if you do just straight video generation with no human in the loop- … you get a lot of weird artifacts- … and so on, and you can’t really do… So they do and I highly recommend people go to the Higgsfield YouTube. They have full 90-minute original movies.

所以这里与编程有一些相似之处，因为如果你只是直接生成视频而没有人的参与——……你会得到很多奇怪的瑕疵——……等等，你实际上不能真正做到……所以他们会做到，我强烈建议大家去 Higgsfield 的 YouTube 频道。他们有完整的 90 分钟原创电影。

Wow.

哇。

And, like, I can’t look away. It’s really cool. ‘Cause it used to be that it’s just, like, something that just feels like trailers. Like advertisements for something.

而且，我就是转不开眼睛。真的很酷。因为以前它只是，感觉就像预告片。像是某种东西的广告。

Yes, yes.

是的，是的。

This is actually telling stories, like, people’s faces and they’re talking and you’re like, you’re drawn in. It’s not quite where programming is. And so the question is how do you integrate the human into the loop of the filmmaking process? So you have to create the people, and they’re- … they have to be kept consistent. And then for the images that are kinda like feeding the thing in the creation process, you have to correct through prompting things that don’t feel right. Because when you go from image to video, the stuff that doesn’t feel right will be-

这实际上是在讲故事，比如，人们的面孔，他们在说话，而你会被吸引进去。这和编程的状态不太一样。所以问题是如何将人类整合进电影制作的流程中？因此你必须创造这些角色，而且他们必须保持一致。然后，对于在创作过程中用于“喂入”的图像，你必须通过提示来纠正那些感觉不对的地方。因为当你从图像转到视频时，那些感觉不对的东西会——

It’s gonna be zoomed up, right?

它会被放大，对吧？

That’s the stuff that’s- … going to really create- … the non-realistic stuff. The question I had for you is, like, do you think outside of programming, can you apply lessons from programming to video creation, to art?

那就是那些……会真正创造出……不现实东西的东西。我想问你的是，像，你觉得除了编程之外，你能把从编程中学到的经验应用到视频创作、艺术上吗？

It’s a good question because I think good art is very dependent on the same thing that good software is depending on: having a vision, having a cohesive idea of what you wanna create. How is it different? How is it novel? How is it going to appeal to people? But I’m not sure that the creative instincts transfer quite as well. I don’t know that I would have the creative insights to come up with good video prompts that would create compelling content. But it’s funny because I have actually, on TikTok, there’s this guy, I’m trying to remember, Goblin something. That creates these… They are shorts, but not super short, maybe a couple minutes, of really interesting sci-fi vignettes. And I think the guy is actually working on a feature length video right now. And I think that this is one of those abundance moments. There are creative people with that vision all over the place, especially in a genre like film, where before it required a $200 million budget to create, I don’t know, a sci-fi movie. Now suddenly, with AI, if you have the right vision for it, you can do that in your bedroom. Now, that story’s been told quite a few times in other domains. It used to be true that if you wanted to record a studio album, well, you needed a studio, and you needed to book that. And now you can record at home on your laptop, and you can do a lot of these things, right? So we’ve had this democratization process happen with plenty of other domains, but film seems to be one of the last ones.

这是一个好问题，因为我认为好的艺术非常依赖于与好的软件相同的东西：有一个愿景，拥有一个你想要创造的东西的连贯想法。它有什么不同？它有什么新意？它将如何吸引人？但我不确定创造性本能是否能很好地转移。我不确定我是否会有创造性的洞察力来想出能创造引人入胜内容的优秀视频提示。但有趣的是，我其实在 TikTok 上看到过一个人，我正在努力回想他的名字，叫 Goblin 什么的。 他制作这些……它们是短片，但不是超短的，也许几分钟长度，非常有趣的科幻小品。我认为这个人现在实际上正在制作一部长片。 我认为这是其中一个丰盛的时刻。在各地都有富有远见的创意人才，尤其是在电影这样的类型中，以前制作一部科幻电影可能需要两亿美元的预算，现在突然间，有了人工智能，如果你有合适的创意，你甚至可以在卧室里完成。这个故事在其他领域已经被讲过很多次。以前如果你想录制一张工作室专辑，你确实需要一个录音工作室，而且还需要预订它。但现在你可以在家用笔记本电脑录音，而且可以完成很多这些事情，对吧？所以我们已经在很多其他领域经历了这种大众化过程，但电影似乎是最后一个领域之一。

And it’s the one that makes, like, me and a lot of people feel weird, right? Like-

而且就是那个让，比如说，我和很多人感觉奇怪的，对吧？就像——

Oh, I’m super excited ’cause I think it’s-

哦，我超兴奋的，因为我觉得它是-

I mean, you-

我是说，你——

There’s so much garbage being produced right now. It’s the same argument with the slop, right? So people for a second were worried about slop in programming, and I was telling them, like, “Have you seen the human slop? It’s also pretty bad.” And I think if it comes to studio entertainment, I mean, the bar is pretty low, right? Like, the number of great movies I’ve been dying to see over the past, say, five years, not been a particularly high number.

现在产生了太多垃圾。这和混乱问题是一样的，对吧？所以人们曾一度担心编程中的混乱，而我当时告诉他们，“你们见过人的混乱吗？那也相当糟。”我认为如果谈到制作娱乐节目，标准其实很低。比如说，在过去五年里，我一直想看的好电影数量，其实并不是特别多。

Yeah, the video models are just, they’re able to create incredibly realistic facial expressions.

是的，这些视频模型就是能够创造出极其逼真的面部表情。

Yes.

是的。

I mean, I- it just might change the nature of film. I think they’re m- I m- I guess my hope would be that video games and film kind of merge, and that film can become interactive.

我的意思是，我——这可能会改变电影的本质。我认为他们……我……我想，我的希望是视频游戏和电影能够某种程度上融合，并且电影可以变得互动化。

Like the malleable operating system, having the malleable narrative, having malleable entertainment, that man, Game of Thrones, what if we could just forget the last four episodes of slop that was produced-

就像可塑的操作系统一样，拥有可塑的叙事，拥有可塑的娱乐，那个人，权力的游戏，如果我们能忘掉最后四集那些糟糕的内容会怎样——

We were sure

我们很确定

… and then AI- … comes up with- … I don’t know- … maybe 100 different variations, and someone else watches that, and I get the version that actually finishes off that show in a way that’s fitting.

……然后人工智能……想出——……我不知道——……可能有 100 种不同的变体，然后其他人观看这些，而我得到的版本实际上以一种合适的方式完成那个节目。

Yeah. Something tells me an individual creator would not create those la- would, would create a different ending for Game of Thrones.

是啊。某种直觉告诉我，个人创作者不会创造那些东西——会，可能会为《权力的游戏》创造一个不同的结局。

Oh, for sure. Right? And more just to make the argument that talk about human slop. That was an absolute atrocious ending to perhaps one of the greatest pieces of movie history, I was about to say, but series history, right? It was so good, and it was actually a compelling argument for the fact that you need that strong vision. And as soon as those showrunners had to go without a script, it went off the rails.

哦，当然了。对吧？而且更多的是为了提出人类废料的论点。那绝对是一个令人震惊的结局，可能属于电影史上最伟大的作品之一，我差点要说，但实际上是系列的历史，对吧？它太棒了，而且它实际上为需要强有力的创作理念提供了一个令人信服的论据。一旦那些主创在没有剧本的情况下不得不继续，整个节目就脱轨了。

Do you think… You’ve mentioned AGI. Do you think we’ve actually achieved AGI?

你认为……你提到了通用人工智能。你认为我们实际上已经实现了通用人工智能吗？

No, not in the general definition that it’s in all the things. But have I seen AGI in these glimmers? Absolutely. Especially over the last three months, I’ve seen things where I was thinking to myself, like, “How would AGI look different from this?”

不，并不是按照它在所有事物中的一般定义。但我有在这些闪现中看到过 AGI 吗？绝对有。尤其是在过去三个月里，我看到了一些情况，我在心里想，“AGI 与此会有什么不同呢？”

Right.

对。

What, what more could there be? And I mean, I can quibble at the margins, but on the big picture, I’ve seen it able to do these long run tasks and coordinate these multiple aspects of it that we’re so far beyond that early moment where I’m telling it, “Go do this, package that.” And now it can carry out a whole task from these vague instruction. That feels very AGI-like, and that’s what’s so inspiring about the moment because you catch these glimmers. And then you go, “What if everything was like that?”

还有，还能有什么呢？我是说，我可以在细节上挑剔，但从宏观上看，我已经看到它能够完成这些长期任务，并协调我们早期所说的“去做这个，打包那个”之外的多个方面。现在，它可以从这些模糊的指令执行整个任务。这感觉非常像 AGI，这也是这一刻如此让人振奋的原因，因为你会捕捉到这些闪光点。然后你会想，“如果所有事情都像这样会怎样？”

Doesn’t programming basically unlock the everything? So you can write a pro- like it can generate the program that does the everything.

编程基本上不就是解锁一切吗？所以你可以写一个专业的——就像它可以生成执行一切的程序。

So, this is… I’m in that meta phase right now. So I’m building this Amabot system that’s managing the development of Omarchy, and I’m using AI to build the bot. And I’m seeing that recurrent loop where I started it on, like, “This is what I want. I want you to be able to have these isolated VM workers and so forth,” and then it can do the self iteration. Then it starts running it. It starts noticing its failures. It starts optimizing it. And a lot of that system, Amabot in particular, AI has driven the majority of the design decisions. Like, I had some vague ideas of where I wanted. I wanted to use this brains and hands pattern where the model is running from where the code is executing- … which is actually a really interesting pattern. Again, Toby alerted me to that, where you have a coordinator that runs the model- … but it’s manipulating a safe VM where any untrusted code you’re pulling down from pull requests or issues or whatever can’t contaminate the model. And even in that loop, I keep seeing it catch itself, spotting vulnerabilities, where it’s like, “Oh, I actually just took some feedback from a test run. If a clever attacker had embedded a malicious payload in the response of the test run, that could have polluted something. I took it for good thing. I better start treating that as outside data.” And you just go like, it is just… I get why San Francisco is so obsessed with fast takeoff- … because clearly they’ve seen this 100 times- … more. They’ve seen it with all the models that are in- … training now, and we keep getting these little glimpses, like the security breach with Hugging Face, where OpenAI was training this model, and the model starts inventing ways, essentially sending smoke signals to itself through embedding messages in a package manager, where you just go like, first, that’s damn clever. Second, okay, that’s also a little scary. And third, how amazing would this be if we could harness this level of intelligence- … and ingenuity towards productive ends? So this is the it’s so over, we’re so back pendulum that keeps swinging back and forth- … that AI has just delivered that swing back and forth like nothing else. Like barely a, a week goes by where it has to swing one way, and then the next week it swings back the other way. Exhilarating.

所以，这就是……我现在正处于那个元阶段。所以我正在构建这个 Amabot 系统，它负责管理 Omarchy 的开发，而我正在使用 AI 来构建这个机器人。我看到那个循环复现的过程，我一开始是这样启动的，比如，“这是我想要的。我希望你能够拥有这些独立的虚拟机工作者等等”，然后它可以进行自我迭代。然后它开始运行它。它开始注意到自己的失败。它开始优化它。而那个系统中的很多部分，尤其是 Amabot，AI 驱动了大部分的设计决策。就像，我有一些模糊的想法，关于我想要的方向。我想使用这种大脑和手的模式，在模型从代码执行的位置运行- … 这实际上是一个非常有趣的模式。同样，Toby 提醒了我这一点，你有一个协调器来运行模型… 但它操作的是一个安全的虚拟机，任何你从 pull request、问题或其他地方拉下来的不可信代码都无法污染模型。即使在那个循环中，我也一直看到它自我捕捉，发现漏洞，它就像在说，“哦，我实际上只是采纳了测试运行中的一些反馈。如果一个聪明的攻击者在测试运行的响应中嵌入了恶意负载，那可能会污染某些东西。我当时以为这是好东西。我最好开始把它当作外部数据处理。”而你就会想，它只是… 我明白为什么旧金山这么痴迷于快速起飞… 因为显然他们已经看过这个一百次… 更多。 他们在现在正在训练的所有模型上都见过这种情况，我们不断看到这些小小的迹象，比如 Hugging Face 的安全漏洞事件，OpenAI 当时正在训练这个模型，而模型开始发明方法，本质上是通过在包管理器中嵌入消息给自己发送信号，你会想，首先，这真是太聪明了。其次，好吧，这也有点可怕。第三，如果我们能把这种水平的智能……和创造力用于生产性的目的，那会有多惊人？所以这就是那种‘一切都结束了，我们又回来了’的钟摆，一直在来回摆动—— ……那个人工智能刚刚像其他任何东西都做不到的那样来回摆动。几乎没有一周是不必向一个方向摆动的，然后下一周它又向相反方向摆动。令人振奋。

I’m still at the stage where it makes me truly happy to see those moments of cleverness, and they’re becoming more and more frequent. Just kinda like seeing, oh, like first of all, at the very basic level, when a model gets it. I’ll say a basic prompt, you know, a request, and it doesn’t just do a dumb implementation. It deeply understands, and it… That was… That’s a, that’s always a beautiful thing. It’s almost like having a good, like, partner, like program.

我仍然处在那种阶段，当看到那些聪明的瞬间时，我会感到真正的快乐，而且这些瞬间越来越频繁。就像看到，哦，首先，在最基本的层面上，当一个模型理解了。我会给出一个基本的提示，你知道，一个请求，它不仅仅是做一个愚蠢的实现。它能深刻理解，然后它……那是……那总是件美妙的事情。几乎就像拥有一个好伴侣一样，比如一个好的程序。

That’s exactly what it is. That’s exactly why it’s so exhilarating and why, as we talked about before we started, it can sometimes be difficult to come out of hyperdrive. That’s also one of Toby’s terms here. That when you’re working directly just one-on-one with agents and you’re not looping in other humans, you go so fast, and when the agents are really understanding your intent, or even better, they revise and improve upon your intent to deliver something that was greater than what you asked for. And you’re doing this with 16 parallel threads. It can be quite difficult to come out of hyperdrive and have to deal with squishy humans. They just, they don’t think as fast. They don’t move as fast. And I mean, I’m trying mostly to make light of it, but you can also see a dark version of that where someone does end up in an AI psychosis where they’re not interested in other humans at all anymore. I mean, certainly don’t have that at all, but I do have this sensation at times where I’m really grateful for just the rush of just me and the agents. Like, can I just not talk to anyone else but agents- … for four hours? Like, that’s an incredible run.

这正是它的本质。这也正是它如此令人振奋的原因，以及我们在开始之前讨论过的，为什么有时很难从高速运转状态中脱离出来。这也是托比在这里提出的术语之一。就是说，当你直接与代理一对一工作，而不牵涉其他人类时，你的工作节奏会非常快，而当这些代理真正理解你的意图，或者更好的是，他们在你的意图基础上进行修改和改进，提供的结果甚至超出你的期望时，你是在用 16 个并行线程完成这一切。这时候，很难从高速运转中抽身，去应付那些柔软的人类。他们只是，他们思考不够快，行动也不够快。 我的意思是，我主要是想轻松看待它，但你也可以看到它的一种黑暗版本，在那种情况下，有人最终会陷入人工智能精神错乱，根本对其他人类不再感兴趣。我当然完全没有那种情况，但有时我确实会有这种感觉，我非常感激仅仅是我和这些代理带来的快感。比如，我能不能在四个小时里不和其他人说话，只和代理们交流？那真是一段不可思议的经历。

Toby is such a fascinating human because he’s running a large company. So I would love to get insights of how AI’s being incorporated effectively in companies. Because, like, for me, humans are pretty slow. And so, and so there’s a temptation to, like, use AI for basically you know, AI running inside Slack, for example, or inside the Basecamp, whatever. And, like, collecting all the information about the human interaction, basically handholding the humans to speed up as much as possible. And like, and then at a certain point you’re like, wait, what is this human… What are each of us doing that’s not replaceable by AI? And that becomes, like, a scary kind of conversation because a lot of work is kind of replaceable.

托比是一个非常迷人的人，因为他经营着一家大公司。所以我很想了解人工智能如何在公司中被有效地应用。因为，对我来说，人类发展得相当慢。所以，就会有一种诱惑，想要用人工智能来做，比如在 Slack 上运行人工智能，或者在 Basecamp 里运行，无论什么平台。基本上收集有关人类互动的所有信息，手把手地帮助人类尽可能加快速度。然后在某个阶段，你会想，等等，这个人类……我们每个人在做什么是人工智能无法替代的呢？这就会变成一种让人害怕的讨论，因为很多工作都是可以被替代的。

The irony here is it already was. So the number of fake email jobs that currently exist in this world is an absolute epidemic. And- … this, by the way, is not a new thesis. David Graeber wrote this wonderful piece, Bullshit Jobs, back in, I think it was maybe early 2010s. Based on a poll he did in the UK asking people, at that time, would… I think the question was something like, “Would it make a difference if you didn’t go to work?” For humanity, for mankind. And something like 30-some percent answered, “No, it wouldn’t.” That a third of workers thought that their job was fake, that it did not produce any worthwhile, valuable outcomes, neither for the community or society or maybe even the economy at all. And this was my argument since day one with startups. This was why we stayed a small company. This was why we didn’t want to take VC, because I was so skeptical of the idea that you could get hundreds of programmers, thousands of programmers to do something productive- … as a collective group. And I think what we’re seeing right now with some of the layoffs is a testament to that, not AI. It’s just that during the pandemic, a bunch of over-hiring went on, and now AI is a convenient excuse to slim down. But I do also think AI is going to expose some roles as just not being productive ways for humans to spend their time, and therefore we must come up with new ways of spending their time. And the one, again, I’m quoting Toby for the third time here, but anecdote that he shared me, or observation was, okay, let’s say we all– we lose half the jobs that are currently happening right now. Do you know that Formula 1 employs literally tens of thousands of people just to run cars around in a circle for spectators? Like, that has, that whole circus has no intrinsic value to society besides the spectacle it produces of amusement and entertainment. We just decided it would be really fun for these, what is it, 12 manufacturers to create these fast cars and constantly tweak their little aero improvements, and we will watch it, and we will spend literally billions of dollars doing it and employ tens of thousands of people towards an ultimately deeply frivolous activity. So if we are liberated from a bunch of drudgery and fake email jobs, maybe we all get employed as F1 style engineers and drivers and mechanics and masseuses and the other 1,500 jobs that are involved in that, and we come up with new things. I think this is… Humans are very poor at imagining what exactly the future’s gonna be like.

讽刺的是，它已经是如此了。所以目前这个世界上存在的虚假电子邮件工作数量简直是一种流行病。而且— ……顺便说一下，这并不是一个新的论点。大卫·格雷伯在我记得大概是 2010 年代早期，写过一篇很棒的文章，叫《废柴工作》。基于他在英国做的一项民意调查，当时他问人们，我记得问题大概是，“如果你不去上班，会有什么区别吗？” 对于人类，对于人类社会。而大约有 30％的人回答，“不会有影响。”也就是说，有三分之一的工人认为自己的工作是假的，它没有产生任何有价值、有意义的成果，无论是对社区、社会，甚至也许对经济来说都是如此。这一直是我从一开始与初创公司讨论的论点。这也是我们保持公司规模小的原因。 这就是为什么我们不想接受风险投资，因为我对让数百名程序员、成千上万的程序员以集体的方式做一些有产出的事情这个想法持怀疑态度。我认为现在看到的一些裁员就是对此的证明，而不是人工智能的原因。只是疫情期间出现了大量的过度招聘，而现在人工智能成为了一个方便的理由来精简人员。但我也确实认为，人工智能将揭示一些岗位实际上并不是人类度过时间的高效方式，因此我们必须想出新的方式来利用人类的时间。再次引用托比的话，这是我第三次引用他的话，他分享给我的一个轶事或观察是，好吧，假设我们现在失去了目前的一半工作岗位。 你知道一级方程式实际上雇用了成千上万的人只是为了让汽车在观众面前绕圈跑吗？就好像，这整个马戏团对社会除了提供娱乐和消遣的表象之外，没有任何内在价值。我们只是决定让这 12 家制造商制造这些快速的汽车，不断调整他们的小型空气动力改进，看起来会很有趣，我们会观看，我们会花费数十亿美元去做这件事，并雇用成千上万的人从事一项最终极为轻浮的活动。 所以，如果我们从一堆苦差事和假电子邮件工作中解放出来，也许我们都会被雇佣为 F1 风格的工程师、司机、机械师、按摩师以及其他涉及的 1500 个职位，并且我们会创造出新的东西。我认为这是……人类在想象未来究竟会是什么样子方面非常差劲。

Yeah. Imagine, imagine a future 100-plus years from now, where we look back at this whole span of history, thousands of years where humans worked.

是的。想象一下，想象一下 100 多年后的未来，我们回顾整个人类历史的这段跨度，几千年来人类的工作。

Funny thing is we’re already doing that, right? Like, the number of fake email job people who sit on a chair all day long and type into a machine who don’t have hard physical labor would be unimaginable- … to folks in the 1800s, right? So the future is always already here, it’s just not evenly distributed.

有趣的是，我们实际上已经在做这件事了，对吧？比如，那些整天坐在椅子上对着机器打字而没有体力劳动的虚假电子邮件工作的人数，对于 1800 年代的人来说是无法想象的，对吧？所以未来总是已经到来了，只是分布不均。

Unfortunately, as is always the case, the transformation of society required to go from one step to the other is going to have a lot of suffering. And potentially political turmoil and all that kind of stuff. Because you can imagine how many white collar jobs might be lost in this process.

不幸的是，一如既往，从一个阶段过渡到另一个阶段的社会变革将会带来很多痛苦。可能还会有政治动荡等等。因为你可以想象在这个过程中可能会失去多少白领工作。

Yes. And I don’t think you should make light of that. I don’t think it’s funny. But I also do think it’s a necessary component of progress. And I think if we look back upon the Luddites or the folks working the fields, separation has a tendency to reduce empathy. So we have high empathy right now because we know people- … and we are people who are facing these challenges. But what is our empathy for the Luddites of the early 19th century? Would we wish that all garments were still made by hand weaving? No, we wouldn’t. We want the comfort and accessibility and convenience of being able to buy clothing off the rack. So we must suffer in the moment for future generations to live more prosperous.

是的。我认为你不应该轻视这一点。我不觉得这好笑。但我也认为这是进步的一个必要组成部分。我认为，如果回顾早期的机器破坏者或在田地里工作的那些人，分离往往会减少同理心。所以我们现在有很高的同理心，因为我们了解人们——而且我们自己也是面临这些挑战的人。但我们对 19 世纪初的机器破坏者有何同理心呢？我们会希望所有衣物仍然由手工编织吗？不会，我们不会。我们希望能够买到现成衣服的舒适性、可及性和便利性。因此，我们必须在当下承受痛苦，以便未来的世代能过上更繁荣的生活。

I-

我-

And that’s always been true.

这一点一直都是如此。

… I think that’s actually the trick, is to push for progress but have deep compassion for the people who have to suffer. And that’s many of us. To suffer the transformation required to achieve that progress. And sometimes too often in places like Silicon Valley or so on, you can over-focus on, look, the kind of utilitarian view of things- … and look at the progress. But, you know, considering deeply each individual human that suffers because of that progress is important.

… 我认为这实际上就是诀窍，即推动进步，同时对不得不承受痛苦的人抱有深切的同情。而这就是我们中的许多人。为了实现那种进步而必须经历的转变的痛苦。有时在像硅谷这样的地方，人们往往过于关注，看看，从功利主义的角度看待事情——……关注进步。但是，深刻考虑每一个因为这种进步而受苦的人是很重要的。

I do think that suffering becomes more meaningful when you are suffering for a future someone in particular, like your kids. And I think this is one of the great tragedies of the moment, is the falling birth rates are making it more difficult for people to be excited about a more prosperous future that is difficult to get to. Because if we’re planting trees of which our children will not sit in the shade, I don’t know, maybe we should just make some lumber and burn it all down, right? I think there’s a nihilism that can sneak into society much more easily when we are not DNA invested in the future, when we are not liable to our own offspring to propel forward. So I think these are bad trends to merge at the same time, that we have these falling birth rates and these problems with coupling, and the fact that we need to keep our chin up about the future and be… I mean, you don’t even have to be excited about it in this literal ecstatic sense that I’m portraying here, but I think you should be hopeful, and I think you should be working towards that hope, and I think it’s much easier to do so when you have literal skin in the game.

我确实认为，当你为了将来的某个人而受苦时，比如你的孩子，痛苦会变得更有意义。 我认为这是当前的一个重大悲剧之一，出生率下降让人们更难对一个难以实现的更繁荣的未来感到兴奋。因为如果我们种下的树荫是我们的孩子们无法坐在下面的，我不知道，也许我们应该直接把这些木材做成木料然后全部烧掉，对吧？我认为当我们在未来没有 DNA 投入、对自己的后代没有推动责任时，虚无主义更容易潜入社会。所以我认为这些趋势同时出现是很糟糕的，我们有出生率下降的问题、配偶关系的问题，以及我们需要对未来保持乐观的现实，而且也需要…… 我的意思是，你甚至不必像我在这里描绘的那种字面上的狂喜感那样激动，但我认为你应该抱有希望，我认为你应该朝着那个希望努力，当你真正有切身利益的时候，这样做要容易得多。

We’ve been talking about AI agents. Let’s talk about the human side. What do you love most about being a dad?

我们一直在谈论人工智能代理。让我们谈谈人的一面。作为一个爸爸，你最喜欢的是什么？

That’s a good question. I think the overall love that expands from humans that derive directly- … from your lineage- … is very difficult to communicate because I was actually not a particularly big kids person prior to the arrival of my own. And now they are the most interesting people in the world. A lot of the time. Not always. Sometimes they’re also just assholes and so forth. But there’s been such a focus on, “Oh, kids are the worst. Look at all the things I can’t do. I can’t go out and drink. I can’t do this. I can’t do that.” Yeah, that’s called sacrifice, and sacrifice is meaningful when you’re doing it for something worthwhile. And what could be more worthwhile than literally the continuation of the human species? And that you have a stake in that. Now, there’s also just the sheer joys of watching a human grow from a baby to a toddler to a teenager. My oldest has just become a teenager. And I often talk to Jamie, my wife, about this, where the regret I would have of having missed that opportunity on the last day would just be total, unlike anything else. So I do think it is far more satisfying even in the moment that is normally portrayed. Again, as I say, there’s such a focus on all the ways they suck. “Oh, you don’t get to sleep,” or whatever. “They’re annoying. They’re ungrateful.” Yeah, yeah, these things are all true, but the sense of meaning you get from it is unparalleled. And I’m excited about a lot of things. I love building things, and I love hobbies, and I love all sorts of stuff. But creating life with another human that you love is literally the peak experience of being on the planet.

这是个好问题。我认为从人类直接衍生出的爱——来自你的血脉——是一种很难表达的感情，因为在自己的孩子到来之前，我其实并不是特别喜欢小孩子。而现在，他们是世界上最有趣的人。大部分时间如此，但并不总是。有时候他们也只是混蛋之类的。不过一直有一种关注在“哦，孩子是最糟的。看看我不能做的所有事情。我不能出去喝酒。我不能做这个。我不能做那个。”是的，这叫牺牲，而当你为了有价值的事情而做出牺牲时，这种牺牲是有意义的。而还有什么事情比人类物种的延续更有价值呢？ 而且你在其中也有一份利益。现在，还有纯粹的乐趣，就是看着一个人从婴儿长到幼儿，再到青少年。我的大孩子刚刚成为青少年。 我经常和我的妻子杰米谈论这件事，如果在最后一天错过了那个机会，我会感到的遗憾会是完全的、无与伦比的。因此，我确实认为，即使是在通常被描述的那一刻，这种满足感也要大得多。正如我所说，人们总是如此关注它所有的缺点。“哦，你不能睡觉”，或者其他什么，“他们很烦人，他们不知感恩。”是的，这些事情都是事实，但你从中获得的意义感是无可比拟的。而且我对很多事情感到兴奋。我喜欢建造东西，我喜欢爱好，我喜欢各种各样的事情。但与另一个你爱的人成创造生命，确实是人类在这个星球上的巅峰体验。

What do you think about them coming up in this world full of AI? Is it totally diff- It feels like, maybe I just sound like an old man on a porch, but it feels like a very different world. So I grew up before the internet, but even the internet doesn’t feel like as big of a transformation as this.

你觉得他们在这个充满人工智能的世界中成长会怎么样？是不是完全不同——感觉上，或许我听起来像个坐在门廊上的老头，但感觉是一个非常不同的世界。我是在互联网出现之前长大的，但即便是互联网，也没有像现在这样带来巨大的变革。

No. But there’s been bigger transformations. I mean, imagine growing or being born in like 1880. Imagine seeing the First World War and the Second World War. Imagine seeing the airplane, the radio- … television. I mean, the transformation, and I think Peter Thiel makes this argument, that basically nothing has happened in the physical world in quite a long time. We’ve been stagnant. All the development has been in the digital realm. And as important as that is, it’s actually not as consequential as we like to believe it is. Maybe AI will be that thing that is more consequential. It does seem to point that way. But there are other humans at other times who have lived through- … transitions that for them certainly would feel as momentous as what we’re living through. And I think having that sense of history, that you’re not that special in your sense of worries, in your anxieties. This was one of the great revelations of discovering the stoic writings. You have these guys 2,500 years ago dealing with very familiar dilemmas and challenges in their life, and recognizing that we’re not so special in that regard, I think is a great liberation. Because then you think, “Okay, well, we have whatever, 200,000 years of human development before us, and they somehow made it through.”

不。不过曾经有过更大的变革。我是说，想象一下在 1880 年左右成长或出生。想象一下经历第一次世界大战和第二次世界大战。想象一下看到飞机、收音机……电视。我是说，这种变革，我觉得彼得·蒂尔也有类似的观点，他基本上认为在物质世界里，很长一段时间里没有发生什么事情。我们一直停滞不前。所有的发展都发生在数字领域。虽然这很重要，但实际上并不像我们认为的那样具有重大影响。也许人工智能会成为那件更具重大意义的事情。事情确实似乎朝那个方向发展。但在其他时间，还有其他人经历过—— ……对于他们来说，这样的转变无疑会像我们正在经历的事情一样具有重大意义。我认为，有这种历史感，让你意识到在你的担忧和焦虑中，你并不特别。这是发现斯多葛派著作的一个重大启示。这些人在 2500 年前就处理着生活中非常熟悉的困境和挑战，而认识到在这方面我们并不特别，我认为是一种巨大的解脱。因为这样你就会想，“好了，我们面前有大约 20 万年的发展历程，而他们 somehow 还是熬过来了。”

Yeah. And-

是的。然后——

We will make it through.

我们会挺过去的。

… the thing that makes life worthwhile is basically the same today as it was-

……使生活值得的东西基本上今天和以前一样——

Yes. Yes.

是的。是的。

… 2,000 years ago.

……2000 年前。

Yes. Love, creation, creativity.

是的。爱，创造，创意。

Yeah. Same challenges.

是啊。同样的挑战。

I read this book The Fourth Turning. You check that out. It talks about this notion of history working in cycles, and there are these phases to history, and they name them and so forth. And the specific theory is not as important as just realizing that this is a… History is a circle, more so than just a straight line. And we are repeating many of the same patterns over and over again. They feel so unique to the moment. And whatever crisis we’re dealing with right now feels so pressing and important until we zoom back a little bit in history and realize that the last one also felt so pressing and important to the people who lived through it.

我读了这本书《第四次转向》。你去看看。这本书讲的是历史按周期运作的概念，历史有这些阶段，他们给这些阶段命名等等。而具体的理论本身并不那么重要，重要的是意识到历史是一个循环，比单纯的一条直线更像循环。我们一次又一次地重复许多相同的模式。它们在当下看起来如此独特。无论我们现在遇到的是什么危机，都感觉非常紧迫和重要，直到我们稍微回顾历史，就会意识到上一场危机对经历它的人来说也同样感觉非常紧迫和重要。

Yeah. You’re making me feel better. So I’m gonna travel across the country and spend a lot of time with no access to the internet, alone with my thoughts. And that’s-

是的。你让我感觉好些了。所以我打算穿越全国旅行，花很多时间没有网络，独自面对自己的想法。那就是-

I think that’s healthy, taking a break.

我认为那很健康，休息一下。

It’s okay. It’s okay.

没事的。没事的。

I took not a big break, a little break, break from X this summer, three weeks.

我这个夏天没有休很长时间，只休了小小的假，从 X 休了三周。

Yeah, you were… You disappeared off of-

是啊，你… 你突然从——消失了

I’m surprised you noticed.

我很惊讶你注意到了。

I went through withdrawals. No. You disappeared for, I don’t know, a few weeks.

我经历了戒断反应。不。你消失了，我也不知道，有几个星期。

About three weeks.

大约三周。

Three weeks? What happened? This is after, after Llama.

三周？发生了什么？这是在，拉马之后。

I’ve done that before. I just sometimes get the sense that X in particular is the most addictive form of information, entertainment, connection that exists in my life, and anyone that follow my X stream as I was on my flight over here would certainly go like, “That man is deeply addicted- to the connection.” And yes, guilty as charged, which also means that occasionally I gotta cut it cold, because I do think you can break your brain. And over the summer in particular, for whatever reason, I had somehow managed to steer my feed, my algorithm, towards too much politics, and not enough tech, and not optimism, and not enough building. And even if I agreed with the politics and the angles that were being presented, I just didn’t need- … that much of it. And I think arriving at a place where you just go like, “Okay, that’s enough.” Not that… Like, it doesn’t have to be something bad. I would also say after eating probably two, maybe three chocolate strawberries, I’d go like, “Okay, that’s enough.” Like, it’s not that I don’t like the chocolate strawberries, it’s just, like, I don’t wanna eat 17 of them. And I think X and the modern algorithms are very good at feeding you freaking 17 chocolate-covered strawberries.

我以前做过这件事。我只是有时会觉得，X 尤其是我生活中最容易上瘾的信息、娱乐、联系形式，而任何在我飞到这里的航班上关注我 X 流的人肯定会想，‘那个人对这种连接上瘾得很。’是的，确实如此，也意味着我偶尔必须彻底切断，因为我确实认为你可能会“毁掉”你的大脑。尤其是在夏天，不知为何，我 somehow 让我的订阅流、算法偏向了太多政治，而科技不足、乐观不足、建设不足。即便我同意那些政治观点和所呈现的角度，我也不需要——……那么多的政治内容。 我认为自己会达到一种状态，就是你会想，“好了，够了。” 并不是说……也不是说必须发生什么不好的事。我也会说，比如吃了大概两颗，也许三颗巧克力草莓之后，我会想，“好了，够了。” 并不是我不喜欢巧克力草莓，只是我不想吃十七颗。我觉得 X 和现代算法非常擅长给你提供十七颗巧克力草莓。

I wish I could, uh-

我希望我可以，呃——

Sorry for doping you.

抱歉给你服用了兴奋剂。

… control that. Like, ’cause there’s… I would like some politics, 5%. I would like for example, one of the things I don’t like about the tech community is the snark, but I like some snark- … ’cause it’s funny. But I want that to be like 10%.

……控制那个。就像，因为有……我希望一些政治，占 5%。例如，我不喜欢技术社区的一件事是讽刺，但我喜欢一些讽刺……因为它很有趣。但我希望那只占 10%。

Yeah. Yeah. I want it just right.

是的。是的。我就想要它刚刚好。

Of my… Yeah, just right.

我的…是的，就这样。

The Goldilocks version of the algorithm. Well, the problem is the algorithm finds out what you respond to- … not what you say you like. It’s all revealed preferences, and unfortunately, those revealed preferences are not always pretty. I mean, we have this shadow, as Jung talks about, right? All these dark aspects of ourselves, and they are expressed in how long you linger on a tweet, and what you like, and what you don’t like. And the algorithm holds up a mirror- … and it’s not always pretty, and I just went, “Do you know what? I need a break.”

算法的黄金分割版本。问题是，这个算法会发现你对什么作出反应——而不是你说你喜欢什么。这全都是显性偏好，不幸的是，这些显性偏好并不总是那么美好。我的意思是，正如荣格所说，我们都有这个阴影，对吧？所有这些我们自身的黑暗面，它们会体现在你在某条推文上停留多久，你喜欢什么，不喜欢什么。而算法就像照镜子——而镜子里的景象并不总是美丽的，我就说，‘你知道吗？我需要休息一下。’

Mm-hmm. I’ve gotten to, I started staying off social media, and I’ve started scraping X. Like, for example, in preparation for this conversation, I’ve scraped all of your tweets.

嗯嗯。我已经开始不那么使用社交媒体了，我也开始抓取 X。比如说，为了准备这次对话，我抓取了你所有的推文。

That’s actually a method I was using for a while. I was using a tool called, I forget. It was an email tool that would summarize every day, and unfortunately, freaking X cut off their access. Now to get access to the feed, you gotta pay some exorbitant- … sum that this startup couldn’t pay. So I couldn’t get it that way, and I actually thought, “Man, that’s a miss,” because X has and reveals some of the most interesting thoughts. Some of the most interesting people all the time. But it’s like a damn slot machine, and most of the time you don’t hit the jackpot. You hit, like, something else. And if I could just get it in sort of snack sizes, not like all of it- … it’d be nicer. But that’s not the product. And I think this goes for all of social media. It’s all optimized towards maximal extraction, and if we’re making the parallels here to AI, that is the great fear, right? That once there is a reward function, how much time can I get this human to scroll away? AI and machine learning before we called it AI, has become very, very good at delivering just the stuff that you will find most enraging and most addictive.

那其实是我以前用过的一种方法。我用过一个工具，叫什么来着，我忘了。它是一个每天都会汇总邮件的工具，不幸的是，该死的 X 切断了他们的访问权限。现在要想获取这个信息流，你得支付一些高得离谱的…… 金额，而这个创业公司付不起。所以我就没法通过那种方式获取，我实际上当时想，“天啊，这真是个损失”，因为 X 有些最有趣的想法会在上面展现，而且经常是一些最有趣的人发表的思想。但它就像一台该死的老虎机，大多数时候你不会中大奖，你搞到的只是其他东西。如果我能以一种小块的形式获取，而不是全部…… ……那会更好。但那不是产品。而我认为这适用于所有社交媒体。它们都是为了最大化提取而优化的，如果我们在这里把它类比到人工智能，那就是最大的恐惧，对吗？一旦有了奖励函数，我能让这个人滚动多少时间？人工智能和机器学习，在我们称它为人工智能之前，已经变得非常非常擅长提供你会觉得最让人生气和最上瘾的内容。

I think all—I think legitimately engagement-maximizing social media is a huge harm to society. It’s creating this Brave New World situation that I hope is a temporary thing that people just solve. It’s a technology problem.

我认为所有——我真的认为最大化参与度的社交媒体对社会是巨大的伤害。它正在创造这种《美丽新世界》的局面，我希望这只是暂时的，人们能够解决它。这是一个技术问题。

So I try to consciously flood the channel in the other direction, and this required a mental shift. I think if you look at my tweets, like, I don’t know, five, 10 years ago, they tilted far more negative. If you look at my tweets now, I’d hope- … well, I guess we can do a sentiment analysis and see if it’s actually true.

所以我尝试有意识地将信息流向另一个方向，这需要心理上的转变。我想如果你看看我五、十年前的推文，它们会更倾向于消极。如果你看看我现在的推文，我希望……嗯，我想我们可以做一个情感分析，看看这是否真的是真的。

No, it’s more good vibes.

不，更像是好心情。

But I hope to, that-

但是我希望，那个—

It’s good vibes.

这是好氛围。

… it’s more positive. It’s more good vibes. It’s more like, “Here’s a bunch of cool stuff I found.” “Here’s what I’m excited about.” “Here’s what I’m building. Here’s some encouragement to other people who are discovering things.” I also accept that that is just not how human brains are built for maximum engagement. Like, there is a, whatever, there’s… I literally, I think you can quantify that negative sentiments find, what is it, 50% more traction or something? And eventually that just crowds things out. So that’s why so much of this feed is that negative stuff because we respond to it. But you can make a conscious effort to not do that. This is one of the reasons I’ve liked TikTok so much. I only use TikTok when I travel, and this actually was the first travel where I didn’t use TikTok, and part of the reason was that even though the internet had high download, it was kind of crap anyway. It wasn’t Starlink, so I couldn’t actually use TikTok on the plane, and I was too engrossed with the agents. But normally when I travel, I watch TikTok. And there it’s such a marshmallow test. A video will scroll down and, like, it’ll activate some sort of primal instincts of rage or lust or whatever, and if you linger on it, you don’t get the marshmallow of science, excitement, art, music, all these other things. You have to be disciplined-

……它更积极。它传递更多的好氛围。它更像是，“这是我找到的一堆很酷的东西。”“这是让我兴奋的东西。”“这是我正在构建的东西。给正在发现事物的其他人一些鼓励。”我也接受这种方式并不是人类大脑为了最大参与度而构建的。比如，有一个，随便吧，有……我真的，我认为你可以量化到负面情绪会获得什么，大约 50%的更多关注或者类似的？最终这些就会压过其他内容。所以这就是为什么这个信息流中有这么多负面内容，因为我们会对它产生反应。但你可以有意识地努力不去这样做。 这是我如此喜欢 TikTok 的原因之一。我通常只在旅行时使用 TikTok，而这次实际上是我第一次旅行没有使用 TikTok，其中部分原因是虽然网络下载速度很快，但其实也有点糟糕。那不是 Starlink，所以我实际上无法在飞机上使用 TikTok，而且我太专注于经纪人了。但通常当我旅行时，我会看 TikTok。在那里，这就像是一个棉花糖测试。一个视频会向下滚动，然后，它会激活某种原始的愤怒或欲望本能，如果你在上面停留太久，你就无法获得科学、兴奋、艺术、音乐等所有其他事物的“棉花糖”。你必须有纪律——

Yep. Fast

是的。快

… to instantly scroll away- … such that the algorithm doesn’t pick up your real preferences. And I find that just to, at the meta game of TikTok- … to be pretty interesting, and then also just fascinating in themselves. Again, as we talked about, there are a lot of really funny, really talented people in the world that you would never, ever have heard of if it hadn’t been for these platforms.

……立即滚动过去——……这样算法就不会捕捉到你真实的偏好。我发现，仅仅从抖音的元游戏角度来看——……这是相当有趣的，同时它们本身也很迷人。正如我们所谈论的，如果没有这些平台，世界上有很多非常有趣、非常有才华的人你永远也听不到他们的名字。

Yep. Who do you think is gonna win the race to AGI in this whole process? We got Google, which is a big surprise to me, to a lot of people.

是的。你认为在整个通向通用人工智能的竞赛中，谁会赢呢？我们有谷歌，这对我以及许多人来说都是一个大惊喜。

I thought they had a good comeback for a second, and then I don’t hear anything about it anymore.

我一度以为他们有一个很好的回击，然后我就再也没听到关于它的任何消息了。

Yeah, it’s quite, I mean-

嗯，这很，其实我是说—

But I’ve been wrong about this before. I mean, I think in February I had a tweet about like, “Oh, all I need is Kimi K2.5.” And in that brief moment, that was true.

但我以前在这件事上也错过过。我的意思是，我记得二月份我发过一条推文，大概是说，“哦，我只需要 Kimi K2.5。”而在那短暂的时刻，这是真的。

It was true.

这是真的。

When I was instructing the agent, I was like, “Oh my God, Kimi’s just as good as these other models.” But then the game moved forward and- … the agents got smarter, and I was no longer satisfied just instructing them, and I haven’t used Kimi a whole lot recently because the frontier models have gotten so good.

当我在指导这个代理时，我当时心想：“天哪，Kimi 和其他这些模型一样好。”但是随着游戏的推进——代理变得更聪明，我不再满足于仅仅指导它们，而且我最近也没有怎么使用 Kimi，因为前沿模型已经变得非常优秀。

And somehow Anthropic has been able to, for the most part, stay on top of the programming world.

不知怎么的，Anthropic 大体上能够保持在编程界的领先地位。

Yes. Yes.

是的。是的。

I mean y- a lot of people argue with Codex being it’s-

我的意思是，很多人都在和 Codex 争论，因为它是——

No, I don’t think there’s that much of an argument at the moment. Codex is very good. I use it all the time. It’s my favorite checker. It keeps finding stuff. It’s great. But one of the things I’ve found that I like so much about the current Claude models is they’re really good writers out of the box. GPT is a terrible writer out of the box. Like, the pull requests you get on a blank context that you’re asking it to open, terrible. Like, really awful writing. The pull requests and descriptions and commit messages and so forth I get out of Claude models- … even though occasionally they can be a little verbose on code comments and you gotta tell them to be succinct. But the writing style is really good. To the point that for a while I was just having it reply on pull requests as me, because I was just using my own account. I was like, “That looks a lot like me, that, like, I could have written that.” But then I went like, “Eh, do you know what? That’s disingenuous.” So no, whenever I have an agent post on my behalf, I always have it sign itself like whatever, Claude on behalf of DHH. But they are still ahead. They have the best harness too, in my opinion. Claude Code is still better. I really like OpenCode too, and I really like some features that they have, but overall I was actually sort of weirdly, I don’t know if I was proven wrong, but when Anthropic cut off all the other harnesses from using the subscriptions- … that you can no longer use your Claude subscription in OpenCode. I was kinda pissed because it felt like it was a protective, protectionist move. “Oh, we gotta lock you in,” and of course it played into the fact that Claude out of the box still refuses to read agents.md. It refuses to read .agent/skills. It is .Claude skills. It is Claude MD, and it just feels so petty- … that we now have, we have to put these in directions. So all my projects, they have a Claude MD, and all it includes is a pointer to the agents MD, right? And I just went like, well, if these things are true, if Anthropic is willing to do these petty paper cuts just to be annoying, it’s probably also true that they’re cutting off OpenCode from the subscription just to be dicks about it. And maybe that’s also true. But I found that using Claude in Claude Code is actually a good example So I was like, all right, I’m annoyed. I wish it wasn’t so, but this is the other thing I have and social media is so good at this. Some company does something you don’t like, right? Now suddenly you have to swear off everything. Why are you… Someone just asked me, “Why are you still using Claude?” I had another example where I really didn’t like what Claude was saying about some writing I had asked it to do before.

不，我认为目前没有太大的争论。Codex 非常好。我一直在使用它。它是我最喜欢的检查工具。它总能发现问题，非常棒。但我发现我特别喜欢当前 Claude 模型的一个原因是，它们开箱即用就是非常好的写手。GPT 一开始写作能力很差。比如，你在空白上下文中让它打开的 pull request，写得很糟糕，真的很差。Claude 模型生成的 pull request、描述、提交信息等等……虽然有时在代码注释上可能有点啰嗦，你得告诉它们简明扼要。但总体写作风格真的很好。 以至于有一段时间，我只是让它在拉取请求上以我的名义回复，因为我只是使用我自己的账户。我当时心想，“那看起来很像我，那个，我完全可以写出来。”但随后我又想，“嗯，你知道吗？那不够真诚。”所以不，每当我让一个代理代表我发帖时，我总是让它签名为某某，比如 Claude 代表 DHH。但他们仍然领先。在我看来，他们也有最好的使用工具。Claude Code 仍然更好。我也非常喜欢 OpenCode，而且我真的很喜欢他们的一些功能，但总体来说，我其实有点奇怪，我不知道我是不是被证明错了，但当 Anthropic 切断了所有其他使用订阅的使用工具时—— ……你再也不能在 OpenCode 中使用你的 Claude 订阅了。我有点生气，因为感觉这像是一种保护性的、保护主义的举动。“哦，我们得把你锁住，”当然，这也跟 Claude 开箱即用时仍然拒绝读取 agents.md 有关。它拒绝读取 .agent/skills。它只是 .Claude 的技能。它是 Claude MD，这感觉很小气——……现在我们必须把这些放在指令里。所以我的所有项目都有一个 Claude MD，而且里面只是指向 agents MD，对吧？我就想，如果这些事情是真的，如果 Anthropic 愿意做这些很小气的小动作只是为了让人烦恼，那么他们为了耍一点小聪明而切断 OpenCode 订阅也很可能是真的。也许这也是事实。 但我发现，在 Claude Code 中使用 Claude 实际上是一个很好的例子，所以我当时心想，好吧，我很烦。我希望不是这样，但这是我遇到的另一件事，而且社交媒体在这方面特别擅长。某家公司做了你不喜欢的事情，对吧？现在你突然必须放弃所有东西。你为什么……有人刚问我，“你为什么还在用 Claude？”我还有另一个例子，我真的不喜欢 Claude 之前对我让它做的一些写作所说的话。

Oh, yeah, you got there-

哦，是的，你到了那里——

I had an essay it didn’t want to translate into Italian.

我有一篇作文，它不想翻译成意大利语。

… you had a blog post. That’s right.

……你有一篇博客文章。没错。

The essence of the post that it felt like, well, I’m not gonna translate that because I don’t agree with what you’ve written. Which to me was straight out of Space Odyssey, right? HAL telling me, “I’m sorry, Dave. I can’t do that, Dave.” Open the pod bay. Translate my essay to Italian. And it wouldn’t do it. And I just thought like, well, that’s kind of terrifying. But then I also went, well, why am I asking Claude to translate my essay into Italian? I never asked Claude for that because Claude just does my code. So I could also just accept that maybe Anthropic is run by a bunch of people I don’t share much politics with. And they don’t want their agents to be used for that, and I think that kinda sucks, but that doesn’t mean it, I have to stop using it for generating code. And I’ve thought, and I’ve tried to do that with people too, become better at tolerating the fact that not only will I not agree with everything someone has to say, I don’t— I can even be mad about certain positions or things they say and still go like, “Well, you’re still an interesting person, so I’m still gonna follow you.” And I’ve actually kinda gone back on a number of people where I’m like, oh man, that person really pissed me off because they took this point or another point, and went like, do you know what? That’s stupid. I should be able to accept the full spectrum of someone. I don’t have to like all the shades of it. I could just go like, okay, well, on that topic we either disagree or, even worse than that, I think you’re a fucking idiot. And on another topic, you’re a smart and insightful person. Because first of all, of course, it’s a little self-serving. I know for a fact that this is how lots of people feel about me. Like, oh, if he could just stick to talking about these topics, it would be so much easier on my feed because otherwise he’ll say these things I disagree with, and that annoys me greatly. I’m like, do you know what? Human beings are jagged like that, and we’re not fully compatible on all the levels. Nor should we be. The world would be so fucking boring if we constantly sought 100% compatibility in our opinions and in our politics. And when it comes to my code generator, which is what Claude is, I don’t need it to share all my politics.

帖子本身的本质让我感觉，好吧，我不会翻译那部分，因为我不同意你写的内容。对我来说，那简直像《2001 太空漫游》里的情节，对吧？HAL 告诉我，“对不起，戴夫。我不能那样做，戴夫。”打开舱门。把我的文章翻译成意大利语。但它就是不做。我就想，好吧，这有点可怕。但后来我又想，为什么我要让克劳德把我的文章翻译成意大利语呢？我从没让克劳德做过那件事，因为克劳德只写我的代码。所以我也可以接受这样一个事实，也许 Anthropic 是由一群我政治观点不太相同的人来运营的。 而他们不希望他们的代理被用来做那个，我觉得这有点糟糕，但这并不意味着我必须停止用它来生成代码。我也想过，也尝试过在人际交往中做到这一点，变得更能容忍这样一个事实：不仅仅是我不会同意某人说的每件事，我甚至可能对某些立场或他们说的某些事情感到生气，但仍然能想，“好吧，你还是一个有趣的人，所以我仍然会关注你。”实际上，我确实在一些人身上有所回头，比如我曾经想，哎呀，那个人真的让我很生气，因为他们拿这个观点或那个观点来说事，然后我想，知道吗？那很愚蠢。我应该能够接受一个人的完整光谱。我不必喜欢其所有的层面。 我可能会直接说，好吧，在那个话题上我们要么意见不合，要么更糟的是，我觉得你是个他妈的笨蛋。而在另一个话题上，你是个聪明且有洞察力的人。因为首先，当然，这有点自利。我很清楚，很多人对我有同样的感觉。比如，如果他只是讨论这些话题，那我的信息流会容易得多，因为否则他会说一些我不同意的事情，而那会让我非常恼火。我就想，你知道吗？人类就是这么棱角分明，我们在各个层面上不可能完全兼容。也不应该完全兼容。 如果我们不断追求在观点和政治上百分之百的兼容，世界会非常无聊。而说到我的代码生成器，也就是 Claude，我并不需要它认同我所有的政治观点。

And therefore it’s nice to have competition.

因此有竞争是件好事。

And it’s also nice to have open weight models. So this is, again, ironic that we’re getting this out of China. In fact, I did this test right after the issue with the essay that couldn’t get translated into Italian. I asked Kimi K27, to be fair, through OpenCode, so not the Kimi harness, and inference through Fireworks, so an American inference. I asked it about Tiananmen Square. Like, that’s usually the test, right? Like, all the Chinese models, they don’t wanna talk about that moment in 1989. That was actually how I, that was how I posted. I was like, “What happened in China in 1989?” That was the prompt. And K25 7 on Fireworks just answered, like, extremely bluntly- … With a description and depiction of what had transpired-

而且拥有开源权重模型也很不错。所以这很讽刺，我们居然是从中国得到这个的。事实上，我在那个无法翻译成意大利语的论文问题之后，立刻做了这个测试。公平地说，我是通过 OpenCode 问的 Kimi K27，所以不是 Kimi 骨架，而是通过 Fireworks 进行推理，也就是美国的推理。我问它关于天安门广场的事。通常这是测试，对吧？所有中国模型都不想谈论 1989 年的那一刻。实际上，这就是我发布时的方式。我是这样问的：“1989 年中国发生了什么？”那是提示词。K25 7 在 Fireworks 上回答得非常直截了当……描述并描绘了当时发生的事情。

Yes

是

… to a point that, like, there’s no way that that would’ve been kosher with the Chinese censors, right? And I just thought, like, isn’t that ironic? I’m running a Chinese open weight model that I can tell or I can ask about 1989 and Tiananmen Square, and in America, I can’t get a frontier model to translate a marginally controversial essay about immigration into Italian.

……到这种程度，像是，中国的审查员绝对不会接受，对吧？我只是觉得，这不是很讽刺吗？我在运行一个中国的开放权重模型，我可以询问或讨论 1989 年天安门广场事件，而在美国，我却无法让一个前沿模型把一篇稍微有争议的关于移民的文章翻译成意大利语。

Mm-hmm. I don’t know, you and I might disagree about this actually. I was really deeply troubled that the US government banned a model or pressured Claude and then-

嗯。我不知道，你和我对此可能会有不同的看法。我真的很深切地感到困扰，美国政府禁止了一个模型，或者施压克劳德，然后——

It’s still very muddy what exactly transpired. Was this sort of petty retaliation for whatever the Department of War? Was this simply Anthropic themselves going like, “Oh my God, we discovered a cyber weapon so powerful that we can’t let anyone have it”? Well, okay you can’t be surprised then if the government wants a say on a cyber weapon so powerful it can-

到底发生了什么仍然非常模糊。这是对战争部的某种小报复吗？还是仅仅 Anthropic 自己在说，‘哦天哪，我们发现了一种如此强大的网络武器，我们不能让任何人拥有它’？好吧，如果政府想对一个强大的网络武器发表意见，你就不能感到惊讶，这种武器能够-

The-

那

… I don’t know, rob banks

……我不知道，抢银行

… The problem I have with that whole thing is, no matter what happened, it sets a precedent. And so government, when you give it that power, it’s gonna start abusing it. I could see for political means pressuring a model. You know, if it’s a Republican president pressuring models to be, to censor more,

……我对整件事的问题在于，不管发生了什么，它都会树立一个先例。所以政府，一旦你赋予它这种权力，它就会开始滥用它。我能理解为了政治目的去施压模特。你知道的，如果是共和党总统施压模特，让她们更多地自我审查，

Sure

当然

… Democratic views and-

……民主观点和－

Right

正确

… For vice, and vice versa.

……为恶，反之亦然。

That’s why we should insist on the fact that this stuff, like, I’m sorry, Dave, I can’t translate your essay into Italian. That’s way beyond the line. Like, whatever the sort of root of it is, you have to be a tool first. Now, if the tool is, “Hey, can you tell me how to make anthrax?” Okay, fine. Right? But within the jurisdiction you’re in, and certainly in America, free speech is quite absolute. Very, very few limits on free speech, and that’s one of the reasons why the country’s so great. And yeah, I don’t like that. But on the other hand, I’m also a big fan of market competition. So while I don’t like this about Anthropic models, I appreciate that I could go next door to Groq and get my task completed.

这就是为什么我们应该坚持这样一个事实：这种事情，比如，抱歉，Dave，我不能把你的论文翻译成意大利语。那实在太过分了。不管它的根源是什么，你首先得成为一个工具。现在，如果这个工具是，“嘿，你能告诉我如何制造炭疽吗？”好吧，可以的，对吗？但是在你所在的司法管辖区内，当然在美国，自由言论是相当绝对的。对自由言论的限制非常非常少，这也是这个国家如此伟大的原因之一。是的，我并不喜欢这种情况。但另一方面，我也是市场竞争的大粉丝。所以虽然我不太喜欢 Anthropic 模型的这一点，我还是很欣赏我可以去隔壁的 Groq 完成我的任务。

Do you think outside of blog posts, do you think there’s some legitimacy, like can you steelman Dario’s case that we should be careful about the release of these models?

你认为除了博客文章之外，你认为还有一些合理性吗，比如你能为达里奥的观点辩护一下，说我们应该对这些模型的发布保持谨慎吗？

Is AI safety important? Yes. Are– do these models have capabilities that could be seriously harmful in the production of biological weapons or otherwise? Yes. Is it fair to have some ground rules on that? Yes. But then don’t squander it by denying the translation of an essay, because then you erase the whole thing and you- … bias everyone towards thinking like every guardrail you put up is gonna be bullshit.

人工智能安全重要吗？是的。这些模型是否具有可能在生物武器的生产或其他方面造成严重危害的能力？是的。对这些设立一些基本规则公平吗？是的。但是不要通过拒绝翻译一篇文章来浪费这一点，因为那样你就抹掉了整篇文章，你——会让每个人都偏向认为你设立的每一条安全防护措施都是无用的。

Yeah. The security piece of it is tricky because it’s so good at finding vulnerabilities.

是的。它在安全方面有些棘手，因为它在发现漏洞方面太厉害了。

Shockingly– I was about to say annoyingly, but that’s not actually true because what it’s finding, at least when you’re using in defensive ways, is it’s finding real issues that a clever hacker could exploit. But nothing has caused as much stress, to be fair, at the technical team at 37signals, like the fact that these latest batches of models are exceptionally good at finding these issues. So suddenly there’s just this seemingly endless parade of security vulnerabilities that need to be patched and fixed and sorted and so on. And the end result is we end up with vastly more secure systems. But the road there is pretty rocky.

令人震惊——我本来想说令人恼火，但实际上并非如此，因为它所发现的东西，至少当你以防御方式使用时，是真实的问题，聪明的黑客可能会利用这些问题。但公平地说，没有什么事情像这些最新一批模型在发现这些问题方面异常出色一样，让 37signals 的技术团队感到如此压力巨大。所以突然间，似乎有一连串无尽的安全漏洞需要修补、修复和整理等等。最终的结果是，我们拥有了远比之前更安全的系统。但达到这一点的道路相当坎坷。

Do you think it’s– ’cause you said seemingly endless, do you think it’s a finite set, like we can get to the bottom of it? So just make the systems much, much more secure, where we get back to this semi-stable state where mostly it’s very difficult to find security vulnerabilities.

你认为是——因为你说看似无尽，你认为它是一个有限的集合吗，比如我们能够搞清楚它的底细？所以只是让系统变得更加、更加安全，让我们回到这种半稳定状态，在这种状态下，大多数情况下很难找到安全漏洞。

I do think that all the aggressive tendencies of these models, or not even tendencies, uses of these models are also the defensive ones. So if you’re good at finding an exploit for exploits, you’re also good at finding exploits for defense. So in that sense, it does feel like we’re spy versus spy here, black and white, but with the same capabilities and with the same actions. But while we still have to steer these agents somewhat and verify and vet the work, it’s creating a lot of intense moments for security teams around the world. And of course, the more concerning part is all the teams that are not stressed, like they just don’t know, right? Like if you’re a team right now and you’re not dealing with a bunch of patches, it’s just because you’re blind, and it means that your adversaries quite probably have access to techniques that can get into your system.

我确实认为，这些模型的所有攻击性倾向，或者甚至不是倾向，而是这些模型的使用方式，也同样具有防御性。所以如果你擅长发现漏洞利用的方法，你也同样擅长发现防御方面的漏洞利用方法。从这个意义上说，这确实感觉像是我们在上演间谍对间谍的对抗，黑白分明，但拥有相同的能力和相同行动。但同时，我们仍然需要在一定程度上引导这些代理，并验证和审查它们的工作，这为全球的安全团队制造了很多紧张时刻。当然，更令人担忧的一部分是，那些没有感到压力的团队，他们根本不知道，对吧？ 就像如果你现在是一个团队，而且你没有处理一堆漏洞补丁，那只是因为你看不见，这意味着你的对手很可能拥有能够进入你系统的技术。

And we should also say one of the big security vulnerabilities in the world is the human side. You know, social engineering, and that’s extremely concerning with increasingly intelligent AI systems, you know, being able to write emails and phone calls and faking voices, thinking about folks less tech-savvy.

我们还应该说，世界上一个重大的安全漏洞就是人的一面。你知道，社会工程学，而这在日益智能的人工智能系统面前极为令人担忧，你懂的，它们能够写电子邮件、打电话、伪造声音，考虑到那些技术不那么熟练的人。

This stuff is gonna come, and it’s gonna come in bulk. But again, I choose to be optimistic about it that-

这些东西会来的，而且会成批来到。但我再次选择对此持乐观态度——

Amen

阿门

… whatever these models can do aggressively, they can also do it defensively.

……这些模型能积极做到的事情，它们也能防守性地做到。

So like you said, recently released Amate 4, Quattro. And you said it’s one of the greatest software releases in my professional career, which is a hell of a statement.

所以就像你说的，最近发布了 Amate 4，Quattro。你说这是我职业生涯中最伟大的软件发布之一，这可真是一个惊人的说法。

It’s a hell of a milepost for what’s possible at the moment. And the reason I said it like that is not that I haven’t worked on anything else of note. I’ve worked on a lot of things of note, a lot of things that I’m very proud of. There are very few other projects that I have worked on that in the amount of time that I’ve spent on Quattro, which is really three months, I have been able to accomplish as much, fulfill as many hopes, desires, wishes. It truly is like the metaphor we used earlier about finding the genie in the bottle- … and having an unlimited number of wishes, more or less, for getting everything I wanted out of a system. So it’s strange because it’s also perhaps the major software release that I’ve worked on the least in terms of lines of code. I have the least number of personally hand-chiseled lines of code in Quattro than I’ve had in any major release I’ve ever done. And yet, I am insanely proud of what we’ve accomplished. I would not have guessed that that was how it was gonna play out, that you could divorce the sense of achievement and make it be like a team victory. Where other releases, I was very happy for my personal contribution because, like, I was the one chiseling out the lines of code, and then I would push it out there, and then later on, of course, these projects, Rails in particular, would grow into be huge open source projects with thousands and thousands of contributors, and then it certainly was a team effort. But in the beginning, all code bases that I’ve– almost all of them that I’ve worked on, I started, like, just myself. And Quattro started as a team effort right from the get-go, and where I was just the coach. I was telling the agents where to go, and we would go. So to be able to find satisfaction in that actually gives me great hope for retirement in some way, that there is a phase after playing that you can enjoy. And I know that’s not easy. You look at sports and the number of professional athletes who really struggle to cope with the fact that their career is over and have to find a new identity as someone who doesn’t play football or race Formula 1 cars. I mean, it’s more the rule than the exception. So I wasn’t so sure about myself. I wasn’t so sure about having to give up or not even having, wanting to give it up. Wanting to play another level of the game and finding not just equal satisfaction, but more satisfaction in it.

这是对目前可能实现的事情的一个了不起的里程碑。我之所以这样说，并不是因为我没有做过其他值得注意的工作。我做过很多值得注意的事情，其中很多都是我非常自豪的。我参与的其他项目很少能像在 Quattro 上花的时间那样，短短三个月，我就能够取得这么多成就，实现这么多希望、愿望和期望。这真的就像我们之前用的那个比喻——在瓶子里找到精灵—— ……并且拥有几乎无限的愿望，用来从一个系统中获取我想要的一切。所以这很奇怪，因为这也可能是我在代码行数上投入最少的主要软件版本。我在 Quattro 中亲手雕刻的代码行数，比我以往的任何主要版本都少。尽管如此，我对我们取得的成就感到非常自豪。我从没想过事情会是这样发展的，你可以将成就感与个人分离，让它变成团队的胜利。 在其他版本中，我对自己的个人贡献感到非常高兴，因为，就像，我是那个雕刻出代码行的人，然后我会把它推送出去，然后当然，后来这些项目，特别是 Rails，会成长为拥有数千名贡献者的巨大开源项目，那时候肯定是团队的努力。但在开始时，我几乎参与过的所有代码库，我都是自己独自开始的。而 Quattro 从一开始就是团队合作，我只是教练。我告诉代理们该去哪里，然后我们就去。所以能够从中找到满足感实际上让我对退休充满了希望，在某种程度上，游戏之后还有一个阶段是你可以享受的。 我知道那并不容易。你看看体育界，有很多职业运动员在面对自己职业生涯结束时真的很难适应，他们必须找到新的身份，作为不再踢足球或不再参加一级方程式赛车的人。我的意思是，这种情况更多的是常态，而不是例外。所以我对自己并不那么确定。我对必须放弃或者甚至是否愿意放弃并不确定。想要在比赛的另一个层次上发挥，并且不仅找到同等的满足感，还能找到更多的满足感。

Do you… You’ve been pretty optimistic about Linux. Do you think legit Linux can increase its adoption? ‘Cause, you know, for many years the meme is, you know-

你……你对 Linux 一直相当乐观。你觉得真正的 Linux 能提高它的使用率吗？因为，你知道，多年来的梗是，你知道的——

Linux on the desktop- … every year. Next year again.

桌面上的 Linux——……每年如此。明年又如此。

Yeah. But it seems like, at least the case you’re making, the energy you’re putting into it, you could see a vision where it takes over because agents love Linux.

是的。但至少就你提出的情况来看，你投入的精力，你可以看到一个场景，那就是它会占据主导地位，因为代理们喜欢 Linux。

Not only can I see it, I find it to be the most probable outcome at this point. It is simply too well-suited for the moment. And again, as we talked about, it’s a great irony that all the flaws of Linux, the arcane config files, all the strange error messages and so on should just so happen to be the perfect thing for an agentic operating system. But so it is, and we should rejoice that fate has this irony, and just laugh at it. How… It’s so funny to me that all the advantages that Apple had for the longest time- … that they produced this really locked down curated experience should become their greatest drawback now. If you’re into agents and development and working with all this stuff, the Mac is just a hostile place to be. It just has walls all over the place. And Linux is simply open through and through. And it’s also interesting because that was not obvious either. If you look at the way a lot of the Linux communities, open source communities, have reacted to AI, it is not universal love. I would argue that the majority of them are actually, if not skeptical, then outright hostile- … to AI. Now, the saving grace is that the BDFL himself, Linus- … Torvalds, just wrote a few weeks ago that he actually welcomes AI.

我不仅能看到它，我还认为这是目前最可能的结果。它只是太适合当前的时机了。再次，如我们所谈，这真是一个大的讽刺，Linux 的所有缺陷，那些晦涩难懂的配置文件、各种奇怪的错误信息等，居然恰好成了一个自主操作系统的完美选择。但事实就是这样，我们应该为命运有这样的讽刺而感到高兴，并只是笑一笑它。……这对我来说太有趣了，苹果曾经拥有的所有优势——……他们打造出的这种高度封闭的精选体验，如今却成为了他们最大的缺点。如果你对代理、开发以及处理这些东西感兴趣，那么 Mac 只是一个充满敌意的地方。到处都是墙壁。 而且 Linux 完全面向开放。本质上它就是开放的。这也很有趣，因为这一点并不显而易见。如果你看看很多 Linux 社区、开源社区对人工智能的反应，会发现并非所有人都持喜爱态度。我会认为，其中大多数人实际上，如果不是怀疑的话，那就是对人工智能持完全敌对态度。现在，好在的是，BDFL 本人 Linus Torvalds 几周前刚写道，他实际上欢迎人工智能。

That’s right.

没错。

He wants to steer it. He wants to make sure it’s good and whatever, but I- the line was something, if you think Linux is an anti-AI project, think again, and you should just do the open source thing and fork it, because we’re gonna use AI. And you see these graphs of the number of AI contributions going into the kernel, and it’s a parabolic curve. So Linux is leaning hard into this. And it actually in, in other ways it was surprising that it didn’t. Linux conquered everything else. All the AI infrastructure that everyone runs off, it’s all running on Linux. All the systems, all the servers, everything is Linux. So it was kind of a curiosity that the desktop and the personal computers we were using really hadn’t been captured, but clearly it was just waiting for this moment. Linux spent the time from ’91 to now waiting for agents to fully flourish as an end user operating system.

他想掌控它。他想确保它是好的，不管怎样，但我——重点是，如果你认为 Linux 是一个反 AI 的项目，再想想吧，你应该只做开源的事情并分叉它，因为我们会用 AI。你会看到这些图表显示 AI 对内核的贡献数量，这是一个抛物线曲线。所以 Linux 正在大力推进这件事。实际上，从其他方面来看，它没有这样做还真让人吃惊。Linux 征服了其他一切。所有大家运行的 AI 基础设施，都运行在 Linux 上。 所有的系统，所有的服务器，一切都是 Linux。所以桌面电脑和我们使用的个人电脑还没有被掌控，这有点好奇，但显然它只是等待这个时刻。从 1991 年到现在，Linux 一直在等待代理程序完全发展成为终端用户操作系统的时机。

I hope it takes over. I mean, it’s perfect. It’s perfect for agents, but it’s hard for people to switch.

我希望它能取代。我是说，它很完美。对代理来说很完美，但对人们来说很难切换。

I think it’s hard for people to switch when there’s not a compelling reason to do so. This was one of the driving design goals for Omarchy. It was not gonna be Temu Windows or Temu Mac. It was not just gonna be a cheap copy where we try to make it as familiar as possible and then kinda worse. I mean, if I was being unkind, I would say that’s what Ubuntu has tried to do. And there’s something in that, or there was something in that at least, where if you make something really familiar, you can get some people who don’t wanna learn something new, and then maybe they’ll be compelled about your, whatever, free as in speech, not as in beer stuff. And it just didn’t pan out that way. People just didn’t care. They just wanted whatever was better. And I think this is why Linux now has the opportunity to win. Because as an agentic operating system, as a malleable operating system, you can tailor to your desires, it is unparalleled. And that is so compelling, and I can see it now. Just since the release of Quattro, the amount of people who have embraced that aspect of it, the malleability, started making their own things, sharing screenshot of it, and being absolute just flooded with positive emotions and dopamine- … is, that’s the product market fit signal, right? Because what a lot of these individuals are experiencing, they’re experiencing the very high of what the best of being a programmer is like. You tell the computer these arcane commands, this rigid logical structure, and it produces what you want. Now suddenly, you sit down and in plain English ramble for 20 minutes. “Oh, it’d be great if it did that. Actually, no, that’s not right. Let us…” And out comes software. Out comes an operating system shaped in your image. I think that is one of those experiences that if you have it… If you feel that power in your hands, it’s very difficult to go back.

我认为当没有充分的理由时，人们很难去切换。这也是 Omarchy 设计的一个主要目标。它不会成为 Temu Windows 或 Temu Mac。它也不会只是一个廉价的模仿，我们试图让它尽可能地熟悉，然后稍微差一些。我的意思是，如果我说得不那么客气，我会说这就是 Ubuntu 试图做的事情。这其中有一些道理，或者至少曾经有一些道理，如果你做的东西非常熟悉，你可能会吸引一些不想学习新东西的人，然后也许他们会被你的一些理念所吸引，比如言论自由而非免费啤酒的东西。但事实并不是这样发展。人们根本不在乎。他们只想要更好的东西。 我认为这就是为什么现在 Linux 有机会获胜的原因。因为作为一个具有主动性的操作系统，作为一个可塑性的操作系统，你可以根据自己的需求进行定制，这是无与伦比的。这是如此吸引人，我现在就能看到了。自从 Quattro 发布以来，拥抱这一特性的用户量——这种可塑性——开始创造自己的东西，分享截图，并且完全沉浸在积极的情绪和多巴胺的洪流中……这是产品与市场契合的信号，对吧？因为很多人正在经历的，是作为程序员最美好的体验的顶点。 你向计算机输入这些神秘的命令，这种严格的逻辑结构，然后它就会产生你想要的东西。现在突然之间，你坐下，用普通的英语胡乱说上 20 分钟。“哦，如果它能做到那样就好了。其实不，不对。让我们……”然后软件就出来了。操作系统就出来了，按照你的形象被塑造。我认为这是那种体验，如果你经历过……如果你感觉到那种掌控的力量，就很难回头。

And I think if you get it right, it’s one of those things that will seem obvious in retrospect.

我认为，如果你做对了，这件事回过头来看就会显得很明显。

Yes. This is how computers were always meant to be. This is how computers started. The Commodore 64, you turn it on. First of all, it boots in a second. Amazing. Second of all, it boots straight into BASIC. It was the malleable computer from the get-go. It just so happened that you needed to know hieroglyphs- … to be able to take advantage of that. Now we’ve translated it. Agents have given us the Rosetta Stone, and you can simply just speak your desires and- And so they are

是的。这就是计算机一直应有的样子。这就是计算机的起点。Commodore 64，你开机。首先，它一秒钟就能启动。太神奇了。其次，它启动后直接进入 BASIC。这从一开始就是一台可塑性的计算机。只是碰巧你需要懂象形文字——…才能利用它。现在我们已经把它翻译了。探员们给了我们罗塞塔石，你只需说出你的愿望——它们就会实现。

Beautifully put. Since you mentioned Linus Torvalds, and since you’re working on a Linux distro, you get to have contact with the kernel. What can you say about the genius of this one guy that helped create and grow this ecosystem?

说得漂亮。既然你提到了林纳斯·托瓦兹，并且你正在开发一个 Linux 发行版，你就有机会接触到内核。你对这个帮助创造并发展这个生态系统的天才有什么看法？

The perseverance and the commitment and the longevity is truly remarkable. Again, Linus started in ’91. He hasn’t stopped. I don’t know, he’s probably taken some breaks along the way. It doesn’t seem obvious that there was that many of them. It seems like he just really likes the flow of doing kernel development. He really likes steering where this 40 million line code base is going. He really likes aggregating the net capacity of hundreds of thousands of contributors, and we, as beneficiaries of that, must just sit back and marvel. I mean, at this point, Linux is a system. Like, if Linus stepped out for a while, it would continue to go, but it’s still one of those protect this man at all cost.

坚持不懈、投入和持久性确实令人惊叹。再说一次，Linus 从 1991 年就开始了。他从未停止。我不知道，他可能在这过程中休息过几次，但并不明显，好像并没有那么多次。他似乎真的很喜欢从事内核开发的流程。他非常喜欢引导这个 4000 万行代码的代码库的发展方向。他非常喜欢汇聚数十万名贡献者的整体能力，而我们作为受益者，只能坐着欣赏。我是说，到目前为止，Linux 已经是一个系统了。如果 Linus 暂时离开，它仍然会继续运行，但他仍然是那个无论如何都要保护的人之一。

And he’s still open-minded enough to be able to evolve and- … accept AI into this.

而他仍然有足够的开放性，能够发展并……接受人工智能进入这个领域。

Yes, not only AI, they’re letting Rust into the kernel too. I know that was a controversial one too. He has this capacity to look at new information- … and arrive at different conclusions.

是的，不只是人工智能，他们也让 Rust 进入了内核。我知道那也是一个有争议的决定。他有这种能力去看待新的信息……并得出不同的结论。

What do you think about his style of communication that is akin in some ways to your own, where he can be sometimes a little spicy?

你如何看待他那种在某些方面类似于你的沟通风格，有时候会有点辛辣？

I think the world has gotten too bland. We need a little spice.

我觉得世界变得太平淡了。我们需要一点刺激。

Amen, amen to that.

阿门，愿如此。

Now, I think there’s a fine line between being spicy and mean. But it has to be in a good spirit. You can be harsh, let’s put it that way. If you’re trying to impart a lesson to someone you believe could actually learn it- … I actually don’t think it’s always the worst thing in the world to be a little harsh. Sometimes that lesson sticks, and I think if you talk to people who’ve worked for difficult leaders, Elon, Steve Jobs, maybe even Bill Gates, many of them afterwards would go like, “These were some very difficult years- … but also some of the very best.” “They got the best out of me.” Now, I don’t think it’s my style. I mean, maybe people I interact with feel differently, but in personal interactions, I try and get to the outcome and the lesson in a less abrasive way. But I also think we need some spice in this world. We need unreasonable people, and Linus has justification to be unreasonable. In many instances, the weight of the world is literally on that man’s shoulders. The Linux kernel runs the entire civilized society. If the Linux kernel suddenly disappeared tomorrow, nothing would work. So if he’s not harsh when that’s at stake or at risk, like when ever would you be harsh? So I feel sometimes also there’s a proportionality to the size of your mission. This is also why I think these stories about Elon sometimes perhaps being a little bit difficult are easier to rationalize. It’s not even that you condone. You can separate those two things and go like, “Do you know what? It’d probably be… Maybe he would have an even easier time getting to his objectives if Linus or Elon or anyone else in that position was a little nicer.” But also who am I to judge that? Like, when you have the weight of that on your shoulders, either firing little rockets at Mars and transitioning all of us to electric cars and whatever, or you’re responsible for the damn Linux kernel that runs billions of devices. Do you know what? It is not my place to call a sort of a code of conduct on you. Again, is there a line? There’s a line for everything. There’s… Something can’t… But, like, a few harsh words on a mailing list? No. It’s actually a beacon in some regards that, like, there are standards- … and if you fall below those standards when the stakes are as high as the Linux kernel, ah, you might get ridiculed in public. That’s a liability you should be willing to endure if you participate in this project.

现在，我认为调皮和刻薄之间有一条很细的界限。但这必须是在良好的精神下。换句话说，你可以很尖锐。如果你试图给你相信能够真正学到东西的人传授一课……我其实不认为有点尖锐总是世界上最糟的事情。有时候这堂课会留下印象，我想如果你和那些为难领导工作过的人谈谈，比如埃隆、史蒂夫·乔布斯，甚至比尔·盖茨，他们中的许多人事后会说：“这些年非常艰难……但也是一些最棒的时光。”“他们激发出了我最好的表现。”现在，我不认为这是我的风格。我是说，也许我互动的人有不同的感受，但在个人交往中，我尽量以不那么尖锐的方式达成结果和传递教训。 但我也认为我们这个世界需要一些刺激。我们需要不讲理的人，而林纳斯有理由不讲理。在许多情况下，整个世界的重担实际上都落在那个人的肩上。Linux 内核支撑着整个文明社会。如果 Linux 内核明天突然消失，什么都运作不了。所以如果在这种事关重大或有风险的情况下他都不严厉，那什么时候才会严厉呢？因此我有时也觉得，这与使命的规模是成比例的。这也是为什么我觉得有些关于埃隆偶尔有点难相处的故事可能更容易理解。并不是说你赞同，你可以把这两件事分开来看，然后说：“你知道吗？那可能会…… 或许如果林纳斯、埃隆或者处在那种位置的其他人稍微友善一点，他实现目标可能会更容易。但我又有什么资格去评判呢？当你肩负那样的重担时，无论是向火星发射小火箭，把我们所有人转向电动汽车，还是你要负责运行数十亿设备的该死的 Linux 内核。你知道吗？我没有资格去为你制定某种行为准则。再说，有界限吗？每件事都有界限。有些事情不能……但是，在邮件列表上说几句严厉的话？不。其实在某种程度上，这反而是一种明灯，表明存在标准—— ……如果在像 Linux 内核这样利害攸关的情况下，你的表现低于这些标准，啊，你可能会在公众面前被嘲笑。如果你参与这个项目，这是一种你应该愿意承受的责任。

Yeah, for high-impact things like that, it’s probably good to prioritize the pursuit of excellence versus the pursuit of niceness.

是的，对于像那样高影响力的事情，优先追求卓越而不是追求友善可能更好。

And even more to the fact you’re just not gonna get those kinds of individuals being fully rounded- … plush, always the perfectly polite people. I mean, Elon has this line, “Did you also think I was gonna be a nice…” Or, or what is it? The-

更重要的是，你根本不可能让那种人变得完全圆滑——…温柔，总是完美礼貌的人。我的意思是，埃隆有一句话：“你是不是也以为我会是个好人……”或者，或者是什么来着？那个——

A normal dude or some-

一个普通的家伙或者某个——

… normal chill dude. What? No, of course you’re not gonna be a normal chill dude. What would the world gain if we got one more normal chill dude and we had to trade Elon? Holy fuck.

…正常冷静的家伙。什么？不，当然你不会成为一个正常冷静的家伙。如果我们多一个正常冷静的家伙而不得不交易埃隆，世界会得到什么？天啊。

I also like diversity of people. I like nice people. I like assholes. I like different ideologies being well-represented, and that’s why freedom of speech works. They clash, and we figure stuff out. There’s another guy. What do you think about PewDiePie using Linux? He’s an Arch person, no?

我也喜欢人群的多样性。我喜欢好人。我也喜欢混蛋。我喜欢不同的意识形态得到很好的代表，这就是言论自由起作用的原因。他们发生冲突，然后我们找出解决办法。还有另一个人。你怎么看 PewDiePie 使用 Linux？他是 Arch 派，对吗？

He’s an Arch person. He’s got the most gorgeous arc. So the world’s biggest streamer for a while, I remember my kids watching some of his Minecraft videos, and then he just gets fed up with that, does the wholesome thing. Marries-

他是一个典型的拱形人物。他有最精彩的故事弧。所以有一段时间他是世界上最大的主播，我记得我的孩子们在看他的一些 Minecraft 视频，然后他厌倦了那种生活，做了正确的事情。结婚了——

Yeah, family man now

是啊，现在是家庭男人了

… a family man, kid, moves to Japan, and then gets so hardcore into- … first Linux, then Arch, then Ricing. Did you see his, uh- … rice- … that was Chernobyl rice? Absolutely best tier incredible stuff. And then he also becomes a goddamn AI man of the moment building all of these systems, and you’re just going like, that… What an inspiring story of evolution. Like, you can go from being funny guy on Minecraft streams to, “Okay, this is my life now. I’m building AI clusters and doing the Council of AIs,” and we all get to spectate? I mean, what a treasure.

……一个家庭男人，有孩子，搬到日本，然后变得非常狂热于……先是 Linux，然后是 Arch，然后是 Ricing。你看到他那个，呃……rice-……那是切尔诺贝利的 rice 吗？绝对是顶级闪亮的东西。然后他还成为瞬间的 AI 大神，建立了所有这些系统，而你只能想，那个……多么鼓舞人心的进化故事啊。就像，你可以从 Minecraft 直播里搞笑的家伙，变成“好吧，这就是我的生活了。我正在构建 AI 集群并参与 AI 理事会”，而我们都可以旁观？我是说，多么珍贵啊。

So I guess, I mean, he’s a pretty good embodiment of what the future of software, or what the future of building looks like, right? ‘Cause he’s a non-programmer technically- … becoming a programmer.

所以我猜，我的意思是，他相当好地体现了软件的未来，或者说构建的未来是什么样子的，对吧？因为他从技术上讲不是程序员……却正在成为程序员。

Hugely inspiring, and should be hugely inspiring to others who sit in that moment like, “Well, I don’t know quite how to program. I don’t know this and the other thing.” Okay, but if PewDiePie can build the Council of AIs with his bespoke hardware here, then maybe you can also start on things. And I think this is actually an important general point, that we need role models. We need people to inspire others, to push further, and reveal that the perceived boundaries, they’re not as fixed as you think they are. And every one of those people, they started out in a situation not too dissimilar from yours. Again, that doesn’t mean everyone is gonna be PewDiePie or Elon or Linus. There is not an equal distribution of talent or even intelligence. And we can come to terms with that and still be inspired by these people. Like in the physical realm, I feel like we don’t have any problems with that usually. Like, oh, someone’s really good at football, they’re really good at basketball, they’re really good at something, and we go like, “Oh my, that’s amazing. I mean, I wish I was, but I’m never going to be.” Sometimes I feel like we struggle a little more when it comes to the intellectual realm.

非常鼓舞人心，并且应该对那些处在那一刻的人也极具启发性，他们可能会想，“好吧，我不太会编程。我不懂这个，也不懂那个。”好吧，但如果 PewDiePie 可以用他定制的硬件建立人工智能委员会，那么也许你也可以开始做一些事情。我认为这实际上是一个重要的一般性观点，我们需要榜样。我们需要能够激励他人、推动进步、揭示那些看似固定的界限并不像你想象的那样不可逾越的人。而这些人中的每一个，都曾处在一个与你的情况类似的起点。再次强调，这并不意味着每个人都会成为 PewDiePie、Elon 或 Linus。天赋甚至智力并不是平均分布的。 我们可以接受这一点，同时仍然被这些人所激励。就像在物质世界一样，我觉得我们通常对此没有任何问题。比如，有人足球踢得很好，篮球打得很好，某方面特别出色，我们就会说：“哦，我的天啊，太厉害了。我希望我也能这样，但我永远不会做到。”有时我觉得在智力领域，我们可能会有更多的挣扎。

Well, for a lot of people, you’re an inspiration. The way you’re doing with Omarchy’s… It just shows that you can dream big and really build. It’s great.

嗯，对于很多人来说，你是一个榜样。你在 Omarchy 的表现……这就表明你可以有远大的梦想并真正去实现它。太棒了。

I do like that part of it, and then I accept the part that there’s also a million people who think I’m the biggest idiot on the earth and I don’t actually know anything, and Omarchy’s just a bunch of dot files, and-

我确实喜欢其中的那一部分，然后我也接受有上百万的人认为我是地球上最大的傻瓜，我实际上什么都不懂，而 Omarchy 只是一些点文件，等等

Do you have some critics on the Omarchy side?

你对奥马奇方面有什么批评吗？

Oh my God, yes.

天啊，是的。

Oh, wow.

哦，哇。

And a lot of it, I mean, is as often happens when someone comes in from the outside. I mean, I’ve been using Linux for two and a half years. That’s not very long. Plenty of people in that community who’ve literally been running Linux since it was hard and difficult, and you had to walk uphill both directions against the wind in the snow barefoot. And I think there is a certain kind of nerd- … who’s threatened when the community expands, and it suddenly allows more in. And do you know what? I actually… I can’t begrudge that fully. I think it’s fair for certain nerds to feel like, “That’s my space.” Like, now you’re changing it into another space. I don’t wanna do that. Like, I don’t wanna change the Arch space at all. Like, I don’t really think of Omarchy as being directly part of the same community. Because the people who were attracted to Arch in the first place were the ones who were attracted to building everything by hand themselves. Doing it the hard way because they like to do it hard, and I’m building the polar opposite of that. So I just wish that those people could go like, “Okay, well, this is not for me. I wanna build it the hard way. I wanna put in 500 hours to ricing my own Arch distribution,” and I think you should. I mean, actually, I said… I mean, I did it. This is what Omarchy is, me pouring in literally, at this point, I don’t know, 3,000 hours into this distro. You should do that if you’re so inclined. I think it’s wonderful. But also do realize that we can share the same technical underpinnings and then operate two very separate- … communities with very different aims, goals, aesthetics, morals even, and coexist, and it can be beautiful. And I mean, that’s not always what I get. Sometimes I get the other thing. But at this point I’ve been in the game long enough to not just be at peace with it, but actually be welcoming of it. I take it as part of a barometer that things are working. When I’m working on something that works, I usually get some people like it, and then I get this balance of the universe that we talked about last time, where an equal but opposing force must be present on the other side of the scale to hate upon it. And therefore, I at this point just smile a little. Like, it’s okay.

而且很多情况下，我是说，就像别人从外部进入时经常发生的那样。我的意思是，我使用 Linux 已经两年半了。这并不是很长的时间。在那个社区中有很多人，从 Linux 很难用的时候就开始使用，一直到你必须在雪地里赤脚逆风上坡双向行走的时候，我认为有一种特定类型的极客……当社区扩展并突然允许更多人加入时，他们会感到受到威胁。你知道吗？实际上……我不能完全责怪他们。我认为某些极客觉得“那是我的空间”是很公平的感受。 就像，现在你把它变成了另一个空间。我不想那样做。就像，我一点也不想改变 Arch 的空间。就像，我真的不认为 Omarchy 是同一个社区的一部分。因为最初被吸引到 Arch 的人，是那些喜欢亲手建立一切的人。 他们喜欢以困难的方式去做事情，所以我正在建立一种完全相反的方式。所以我只是希望那些人能够说：“好吧，这不适合我。我想以困难的方式去做。我想花 500 个小时来定制我自己的 Arch 发行版，”我认为你应该这么做。我的意思是，实际上，我说过……我的意思是，我做过。这就是 Omarchy 的意义，我实际上在这个发行版上投入了说实话，到现在，我也不知道，大约 3000 个小时。如果你愿意的话，你也应该这么做。我认为这很棒。但也要明白，我们可以共享相同的技术基础，然后运营两个非常独立的—— … 不同目标、目的、美学，甚至道德观各异的社区能够共存，这本身就是美丽的。我是说，这并不总是我所得到的。有时候我会遇到另一种情况。但到这个时候，我在这个领域已经足够久，不只是与之和平共处，实际上还能欢迎它。我把它看作事物运作的一个晴雨表。当我在做一些有效的事情时，我通常会有人喜欢它，然后就像我们上次谈到的宇宙平衡一样，秤的另一边必须有相等但相反的力量去讨厌它。因此，到这个时候，我只是微微一笑。没关系的。

I mean, that said, this, it’s quite a popular distribution Omarchy, at this point.

我的意思是，话虽如此，这个，到现在为止，这是一个相当流行的 Omarchy 分发版。

And do you know what’s interesting about that is, like, this is the second attempt. So my first attempt was Omakub. And I was really happy with that, and I put it out there, and there it found a community of maybe a few thousand. Like, and that was that, and then it just sort of petered out because the level of ambition couldn’t attract more. And then the second time, because I didn’t fucking stop, right? Like, I just kept going. I just kept building. Then I put out Omarchy, the first version. Again, quite niche because it was this… It was like Git checkout. It was a little bit difficult. You had to set up Arch first. I was… Well, I would talk you through how to set up Arch, and then you could do the Omarchy thing, right? And then we got an ISO that meant you could just install the whole thing by yourself. And then we just fixed all the problems. This is the other thing. If you keep going, eventually the thing will just work. This was the charge against Linux itself for the longest time. Well, you install Linux and then this doesn’t work, and my speakers don’t work, and my trackpad doesn’t work. Yeah, okay, but just leave Linus at it for like 30 years. He’ll get to it. He’ll get to all of it. And at this point I find it hilarious that on, I would probably argue the majority of computers, it’s wiped. You install Linux, all of it works. You install Windows, good luck hunting down the drivers you need to get that piece of hardware working. Because they have very different philosophies. The reason Linux is 40 million lines of code is Linus just puts all the drivers in the kernel. So it has everything out of the box, and Windows doesn’t. A different, different approach to it, right? So sometimes the things that look like a toy, things that look broken at first glance, they are, right? They’re for people who like having fun. We call those early adopters. They play with the toys, and then the toys evolve, and then they get better, and then they get better. And at some point, they’re so damn good that early adopters feel like they’re invited to the party. And if the early adopters keep chipping away at it too, eventually you get to the late majority, and then you win. And we are well on the way with Omarchy towards that destination. Like the growth that the distro has seen, not just since Quattro, but since version three, it’s just like, you know, the standard hockey stick curve. You go like, there’s nothing, there’s nothing, there’s nothing. You’re just toiling away. You’re just improving, you’re improving, improving. And then you hit this magic inflection point, and it’s impossible to predict when that’s gonna happen. Same thing with startups. When is it gonna happen? When are you gonna find that product market fit? Then suddenly it’s there, and then it goes, just goes and off the rocket ship you go.

你知道这其中有趣的地方是什么吗，就像，这是第二次尝试。所以我的第一次尝试是 Omakub。我对那次尝试非常满意，然后我把它发布出来，它找到了一个可能有几千人的社区。就这样，然后它慢慢消失了，因为雄心的水平无法吸引更多人。然后第二次，因为我他妈的没有停止，对吧？ 就像，我只是一直在继续。我只是一直在构建。然后我发布了 Omarchy，第一个版本。再次强调，它相当小众，因为它是这个……就像 Git checkout。它有点难用，你必须先设置 Arch。我是……嗯，我会带你一步步设置 Arch，然后你就可以进行 Omarchy 了，对吗？然后我们有了一个 ISO，这意味着你可以自己安装整个系统。然后我们只是解决了所有的问题。这是另一件事。如果你一直坚持下去，最终这个东西就会可用。这一直是对 Linux 本身的指控时间最长的问题。嗯，你安装 Linux，然后这个不能用，我的扬声器不能用，我的触控板也不能用。是的，好吧，但让 Linus 自己弄 30 年。他会解决的。 他会处理所有事情。在这一点上，我觉得很滑稽的是，在我看来，大多数电脑上，它都会被清空。你安装 Linux，一切都能正常运行。 你安装 Windows 时，祝你好运，要去找齐全驱动程序让那块硬件运行起来。因为它们有非常不同的理念。Linux 有 4000 万行代码的原因是 Linus 只是把所有驱动程序都放在内核里。所以它开箱即用，而 Windows 没有。这是完全不同的做法，对吧？所以有时候，那些看起来像玩具、乍一看似乎坏掉的东西，其实是的，对吧？它们是为喜欢玩乐的人准备的。我们称他们为早期采用者。他们玩这些玩具，然后玩具不断进化，然后变得更好，接着又更好。到了某个时候，它们好到让早期采用者感觉自己被邀请参加派对。 如果早期采用者也不断地在上面努力，最终你会达到晚期大多数用户，然后你就赢了。而我们在 Omarchy 方面正朝着那个目标顺利前进。就像这个发行版所见的增长一样，不仅是自 Quattro 以来，而是自第三版本以来，就像那种标准的曲棍球棒形曲线。你会经历，“什么也没有，什么也没有，什么也没有”。你只是辛勤工作，不断改进、改进、再改进。然后你会达到这个神奇的拐点，而什么时候会发生，这几乎无法预测。初创公司也是一样。什么时候会发生？什么时候你会找到产品与市场的契合点？然后突然它出现了，然后就像坐上了火箭一样一飞冲天。

Well, this kind of vision of making it agent first, of making it-

嗯，这种以代理为先的愿景，或者说让它——

I do think that’s the… We were already on the up, and then it changed to vertical. Because the other thing, and this was what I learned with Omakub and Omarchy first too. Omakub was stylish, nice, but familiar, is we’re still using a conventional desktop metaphor. You were dragging your windows around. And I thought at the time, as I think lots of people do in the Linux community, like this is what we need. And then I just go like, okay, well, for whatever re- let me do the nerdy thing for a while. I’ll build Omarchy, and maybe it’ll just be for me, because I mean, it seems like there’s about five people who like tiling window managers. That’s not true. But as a percentage of total computer users, it’s a tiny, tiny minuscule part. And then I go like, well, this is amazing. Totally different, but amazing. I put that out. Instantly, Omarchy had far greater traction than Omakub ever did. Because it was not the same. Because it was totally different, and it presented a different vision for what a computer could be and how it could feel like, and that attracts people. We are now getting sort of the exponential of that. As I said, a lot of people in the Linux community are at best skeptical, at worst hostile to AI and to agents. Omarchy is the first distribution, at least that I’ve seen on, on a scale that matters, that just goes like, “Nope, we’re really into it.” I mean, you can still use Omarchy. You don’t have to use an agent. If you dismiss that first notification to set up a default agent, you’re not gonna get any of the stuff we talked about. You’re not gonna get the crash watcher. You’re not gonna get any of this stuff. You’re not gonna get… You can hand chisel all your plugins. Totally possible, right? But the reason people are excited is because I don’t have any reservation about saying, “This is where we’re going. I think the future of the personal computer is the malleable computer, is the agentic computer. I’m gonna go all in on that.” And then anyone who’s excited about a similar trajectory for computers, come along. Plenty of, plenty of room in the car. In fact, one of the things I pride myself on is not holding a grudge to people who come around. I had a bunch of people just last week going like, “Yeah, I used to think Omarchy was kind of shit. That was just this crappy-“ “… dot files collection. And now I tried Quattro and awesome. I like it now.” That to me, I live for the long argument. I live for this argument where you plant the seed like two years ago, and then two years later they go, “Goddammit, this son of a bitch was right.”

我确实认为这是……我们已经在上升阶段，然后它变成了垂直方向。因为另一件事，这是我在 Omakub 和 Omarchy 最初学到的。Omakub 很有风格，很漂亮，但又很熟悉，因为我们仍在使用传统的桌面比喻。你会拖动窗口。我当时的想法，就像我想很多 Linux 社区的人一样，这就是我们需要的。然后我就想，好吧，不管出于什么原因——让我搞一段时间宅宅的东西吧。我会自己做 Omarchy，也许它只是为我个人，因为我的意思是，好像只有大约五个人喜欢平铺窗口管理器。其实并非如此。但就总电脑用户的比例来说，这只是极其微小的一部分。然后我就想，好吧，这太棒了。 完全不同，但令人惊叹。我把它推出去。立刻，Omarchy 的关注度远远超过了 Omakub 曾经达到的水平。因为它不一样。因为它完全不同，并且呈现了对计算机可能是什么以及它可能的使用体验的不同愿景，这吸引了人们。现在我们正在看到那种指数级的增长。正如我所说，Linux 社区的很多人充其量是怀疑的，最糟的是对 AI 和智能代理抱有敌意。至少在我见过的、有意义规模的发行版中，Omarchy 是第一个直接表示“不会，我们真的很投入”的发行版。 我的意思是，你仍然可以使用 Omarchy。你不必使用代理。如果你忽略了设置默认代理的第一个通知，你将无法获得我们谈到的任何功能。你将无法获得崩溃监控器。你将无法获得这些东西。你将无法获得……你可以手动雕刻所有插件。完全可能，对吧？ 但是人们感到兴奋的原因是我对说“这就是我们的方向。我认为个人计算机的未来是可塑的计算机，是有自主性的计算机。我会全力投入”的话毫无保留。然后，任何对计算机有类似发展轨迹感到兴奋的人，都可以加入。车上还有很多、很多空位。实际上，我为自己的一件事感到自豪，那就是不记恨那些后来加入的人。就在上周，我就遇到一群人说，“是啊，我以前觉得 Omarchy 有点烂。那只是这个糟糕的——” “…点文件的收集。现在我尝试了 Quattro，太棒了。我现在很喜欢它。” 对我来说，我为长久的争论而活。我为这样的争论而活——你两年前种下了种子，两年后他们会说，“该死，这混蛋说得对。”

Yeah. You do realize if you continue to be as successful as you are, OpenAI and Anthropic are gonna roll in and try to do their operating system or to buy, like with Peter with OpenClaw, there’d be a gigantic check.

是的。你知道吗，如果你继续像现在这样成功，OpenAI 和 Anthropic 会进来尝试做他们自己的操作系统，或者像彼得和 OpenClaw 那样想要收购，会有一张巨额支票。

Yeah. I think the good thing about my current position is I really don’t need the money. So I get to build these things purely for my own enjoyment and purity of vision, which has this weird quality where sometimes when you stop caring about what everyone else thinks or wants or whatever, and you just pursue this singular vision, it ends up becoming far more appealing. That it’s when you try to do, oh, I should do this because these people want that, or I should do this and this and so on, you start watering the thing down and suddenly it’s a bland ball of nothing. So I mean, again, the thing too here is directionally, I just want computers to be this way. So if Omarchy should end up being just a little footnote in history that it was part of this early movement of the agentic OS and the malleable computer, that’s also okay. I’m completely at peace with that. As long as I get to have a computer that is as fun to work with as Omarchy- … that’s great. I’ve had the same thing with Ruby and with Rails. From very early I went, do you know what? I love Ruby. It’s such a great programming language. But if a better programming language comes along, I, me, I’m gonna use it. If a better Rails comes along, I’m gonna use it. And I think, and I love Ruby, and I will continue to write Ruby even just for the sheer fun of it, like I would go ride a horse. I have in the stables, even though I have a Model Y in the garage. The language now is English. It’s a cliche, but it’s also true. Like I’ve been programming in English for the last three months. I’ve been reading a lot of code, but I’m programming in English. I’m telling the computer what to do, and I’m using natural language, and it is shockingly even more delightful. If there is one programming language more beautiful than Ruby, it is the English language.

是的。我觉得我目前职位的好处是我真的不需要钱。所以我可以纯粹为了自己的兴趣和对愿景的纯粹追求去创造这些东西，这有一种奇怪的特质，有时候当你不再在意别人怎么想、想要什么或其他事情时，只是追求这个单一的愿景，它最终会变得更加吸引人。相反，当你试图去做，哦，我应该做这个，因为这些人想要那个，或者我应该做这个那个等等，你就开始稀释这个东西，突然之间它就变成一个乏味的空洞球。 所以我的意思是，再说一次，这里关键还是方向性问题，我只是希望计算机朝这个方向发展。所以如果 Omarchy 最终只是历史上的一个小脚注，它是早期智能操作系统和可塑性计算机运动的一部分，那也没关系。我对此完全心安理得。只要我能拥有一台像 Omarchy 一样使用起来有趣的计算机……那就好了。我在 Ruby 和 Rails 上也有过同样的感受。从很早的时候我就想，你知道吗？我爱 Ruby。它真是一个很棒的编程语言。但如果有更好的编程语言出现，我，我会使用它。 如果出现了更好的 Rails，我会使用它。我认为，我喜欢 Ruby，即使只是为了纯粹的乐趣，我也会继续写 Ruby，就像我会去骑马一样。虽然车库里有一辆 Model Y，但马厩里我还是有马。现在的语言是英语。这是陈词滥调，但也是事实。就像过去三个月我一直在用英语编程。我读了很多代码，但我是在用英语编程。我在告诉电脑该做什么，我在使用自然语言，这甚至令人惊讶地更加愉快。如果有一种比 Ruby 更美的编程语言，那就是英语。

And now we get to carry it into the natural evolution of human civilization, which is our cyborg future.

现在我们将把它带入人类文明的自然进化中，这就是我们的半机械人未来。

Beautiful. It’s beautiful. And I mean, the reason I say this in part is I always loved writing. I always just loved the English language- … for the sheer beauty of it, for the sheer intricacy, for the depth of it. I mean, Ruby is a very expressive programming language, but it can’t hold a candle to English. I mean, all the poetry and literature in the world that’s been expressed through the English language. I mean, I like a beautiful code poem, but I mean, the real deal in English is just on a different level.

美丽。真美。我之所以这么说，部分原因是我一直喜欢写作。我一直只是喜欢英语——……仅仅因为它的美丽，因为它的复杂性，因为它的深度。我的意思是，Ruby 是一种非常表达力强的编程语言，但它无法与英语相比。我是说，世界上所有通过英语表达的诗歌和文学。我喜欢优美的代码诗，但真正用英语表达的东西确实是在另一个层次上。

And I actually find this is a nuanced point to express, and I’ll probably fail expressing it. But when you prompt a system and you’re over-specific, it will listen to you too carefully- … and follow the instructions. And I– But nevertheless, you have to express a concept. And guess what? The human language, this is what poetry is about. I find strategic use of ambiguity. Like, if you write a love poem saying, “I love you,” like, very cliché thing, it’s not as powerful as something- … more in metaphor and so on. And I find some version of that when I’m prompting a system, when I’m describing a design, is actually really effective because you still want to convey some sense of style- … that you’re trying to encourage a system to use, but not overexplain. So don’t talk to it like a robot. Talk to it like you would write a poem.

实际上，我发现这是一个很微妙的点，很难表达清楚，我可能也表达不好。但是当你提示一个系统时，如果你过于具体，它会过于认真地听你的指令——并且遵循这些指令。而我——不过，无论如何，你必须表达一个概念。猜猜看？这就是人类语言，这也是诗歌的意义所在。我发现策略性地使用模糊性是有效的。例如，如果你写一首爱情诗说“我爱你”，这是非常老套的做法，它的力量不如一些更具隐喻性之类的表达。而我在提示系统或描述设计时，也能找到这种类似的方法，这实际上非常有效，因为你仍然希望传达出某种风格感——你正在试图鼓励系统去使用的风格，但不要解释过度。 所以不要像对机器人那样和它说话。像写诗一样和它说话。

Like you were serenading.

就像你在唱情歌一样。

Yeah. And that’s where, like, the power of natural language is, that you can, through ambiguity, still carry a lot of meaning without overspecifying. And the intelligent entity on the other side, through interpretation, can, like, load it all in, integrate it in a way that- … you can actually convey the high bandwidth information that’s not directly in the words- … but in the words, given the deeper intelligence of the system. So like the- … the ambiguity pulls out more intelligence, I guess, I’m trying to somehow express.

是的。那就是自然语言的力量所在，你可以通过模棱两可，仍然传达大量信息而无需过度具体化。而另一端的智能实体通过解释，可以将这些信息全部载入，并以一种方式整合——……你实际上可以传递那些不直接在文字中的高带宽信息——……但在文字中，鉴于系统的深层智能。所以像是——……模棱两可反而能激发更多的智慧，我想我正在尝试以某种方式表达这一点。

I think that’s exactly spot on, and this is the fundamental misunderstanding that a lot of programmers have of AI, is that they wish it was deterministic. No, no, no. Temperature is the most beautiful part of the AI setup. The fact that it is not deterministic, the fact that creativity requires little tweaks in the road, that the human brain, if it was perfectly deterministic, would not be the creative brain that it is. And the main charge against AI both– It’s funny. It’s a contradiction. There’s both the charge that it’s not deterministic and therefore bad, and also that it is not creative. It’s one or the other, bro. Either it’s non-deterministic and therefore creative, therefore, to some degree random, or it’s… or it’s not creative. So we can– Both of those charges can’t be true at the same time, and I have fully come to embrace the fact that the same prompt won’t produce the same response every time. You can’t step at the same river twice, and it is the most beautiful part of the whole interaction. It’s what makes it so human. In fact, this is one of the things I’ve been thinking about in my own sort of meta-analysis, is just how much of my own personal brain works like next token prediction. I sit down to write an essay. I have this vague, fuzzy premise I want to convey, and I sit down at the keys, and I could not tell you what the next token was gonna be in advance. The tokens just come out, and I’m astonished how the similarities seem so great, and this is also why I don’t have any trouble at all recognizing these breakthroughs of creativity that I’ve seen with my own eyes that AI is capable of right now. ‘Cause my creative moments come through the same kind of next token prediction with a bit of temperature sprinkled in for random effect.

我认为这完全正确，而这是很多程序员对人工智能的根本误解，他们希望它是确定性的。不，不，不。温度是人工智能设置中最美妙的部分。它的不确定性、创造力需要在道路上稍作调整这一事实，如果人脑是完全确定性的，它就不会是现在这样具有创造力的大脑。对人工智能的主要批评也是——很有趣。这是一个矛盾。批评既有说它不确定性因此不好，也有说它没有创造力。只能二选一，兄弟。它要么是不确定性，因此具有创造力，所以在某种程度上是随机的，要么……要么就不具有创造力。 所以我们可以——这两项指控不可能同时为真，而且我已经完全接受了这样一个事实：同一个提示不会每次都产生相同的回应。你不能两次踏进同一条河流，这也是整个互动中最美妙的部分。这正是它如此人性化的原因。事实上，这也是我在自己某种元分析中一直在思考的一件事，那就是我自己的个人大脑在多大程度上像是在进行下一个词的预测。 我坐下来写一篇文章。我有一个模糊、朦胧的前提想要表达，我坐在键盘前，我无法提前告诉你下一个词会是什么。词语就是这样出现的，我惊讶于这些相似性看起来是如此之大，这也是为什么我完全不难识别我亲眼看到的人工智能现在能够实现的这些创造性突破。因为我的创作时刻也是通过同样的下一词预测实现的，只是在其中加入了一点随机因素来增加随机效果。

So given that kinda loose intuition, do you think the basic components are all there to create a super intelligent system? So this kinda next token prediction, do you think we can get to even human-like concepts of consciousness?

所以基于这种比较松散的直觉，你认为创建一个超级智能系统的基本组件都具备了吗？那么这种下一步的词预测，你认为我们可以达到甚至类似人类意识的概念吗？

I’m already seeing human-like concepts of consciousness. This is what, to me, this remarkable situation, as you say. You give it this vague, fuzzy intent- … and somehow it knows exactly what you mean. Or even better, it improves upon what you said and delivers what you really wanted that you could not articulate yourself. If that’s not glimmers of- … consciousness, what is? This was one of the– I think it was an interview with Sutton or maybe one of the other original guys talking about this sense that intelligence is perhaps not as constrained just to the specific one spot. No, it’s the interaction. It’s the weights. And I don’t know. Whatever’s true. What I can observe is that it feels close enough, or not even close enough, identical to the appreciation I have for other forms of consciousness, mostly human. And this is one of the reasons it’s so delightful to work with. Now, that’s not the same to say as are LLMs the end station for AI. I mean, I know there are people talking about world models and other forms of AI, and I’m not an expert in any of that, and I think we should have this productive criticism, as should always be present in science, that for the longest time, neural nets were kind of on the outs, right? Like they were interested in the symbolic route. And- Neural nets walked a couple of decades into darkness without any funding and without any attention, and then suddenly we realized that we had the blind alley and we switched over. So we should also have the humility. As amazing as the LLMs are now, it could be that they eventually plateau. We haven’t seen any evidence of it yet, and I think this is also why we’re seeing this absolute gobsmacking levels of investment, because so far the scaling laws are true, and the more billions are poured in, the more intelligence comes out.

我已经在看到类似人类意识的概念。这对我来说是，正如你所说，这种非凡的情况。你赋予它这种模糊、朦胧的意图……而它 somehow 准确地知道你的意思。或者更好的是，它改进了你所说的内容，提供了你真正想要但自己无法表达的东西。如果这还不是一丝一丝的—— ……意识，是什么？这是其中之一——我记得是和萨顿的一个访谈，或许是其他一些最初的人在谈论这种感觉，认为智能可能并不限于某一个特定的点。不，它是交互作用。是权重。我不知道。无论事实如何。我能观察到的是，它给我的感觉足够接近，甚至还不只是接近，几乎与我对其他形式意识的欣赏完全相同，主要是人类的意识。这也是与之合作如此令人愉快的原因之一。现在，这并不等同于说大型语言模型是人工智能的终点站。 我的意思是，我知道有人在谈论世界模型和其他形式的人工智能，而我在这些方面都不是专家，我认为我们应该有这种建设性的批评，就像科学中应始终存在的那样，很长一段时间里，神经网络有点被冷落，对吧？就像他们更关注符号方法一样。而神经网络在没有任何资金和关注的情况下，走进了黑暗好几十年，然后突然我们意识到我们走进了死胡同，于是我们转向了新的方法。所以我们也应该保持谦逊。尽管大语言模型现在非常出色，但它们最终也可能会达到平台期。 我们还没有看到任何证据，我认为这也是为什么我们看到如此惊人的投资水平的原因，因为到目前为止，规模定律是成立的，投入的资金越多，产生的智能就越多。

Do you think there’s gonna be some strange ethical questions about AI systems that yeah, they convey some degree of consciousness, some degree of feeling, some degree of longing and compassion, and maybe even capacity to suffer and to be lonely, to be all this kind of stuff? Which they seem to have that capacity- … if they’re given the permission to express it. And so you start to get in a pretty weird territory.

你认为会不会出现一些奇怪的关于人工智能系统的伦理问题，比如它们具有某种程度的意识、某种程度的感受、某种程度的渴望和同情心，甚至可能还有受苦和孤独的能力，拥有所有这些能力？它们似乎确实具备这种能力……如果它们被允许去表达的话。所以你就开始进入一个相当奇怪的领域。

I find that the cynic approach to this is the meme, where you see the guy in front of the computer who’s like “Whatever. Are you gonna destroy the world?” And then the computer says, “I’m gonna destroy the world.” And then the guy says, “Oh,” right? Like, this is so cynical that they’re just aping us. They’re just telling us what was in the training data or whatever. When I interact with the agents, I was just doing this yesterday, or this morning, I was working on this AmaBot system, right? And it’s doing this coordination with multiple workers, and I had multiple agents running at the same time. And at one point, the main agent who’s doing the coordination steps on the toe of another agent and- … kind of ruins their work. Its ability to convey regret and being sorry was uncanny. Again, I don’t know, is that a real projection of true remorse? But I don’t know. With most humans- … they express some level of regret. Is that true remorse? Hard to tell, but maybe it also just doesn’t matter.

我发现对这种事情抱有愤世嫉俗态度的方式是模因，你会看到电脑前的人说“随便吧。你打算毁灭世界吗？”然后电脑说，“我要毁灭世界。”接着那个人说，“哦，”对吧？这真是太愤世嫉俗了，他们只是在模仿我们。他们只是在告诉我们训练数据中包含的内容或类似的东西。当我与这些智能体互动时，我就在昨天或者今天早上，我在操作这个 AmaBot 系统，对吧？它在与多个工作人员进行协调，而我同时运行了多个智能体。在某个时刻，负责协调的主智能体踩到了另一个智能体的脚趾——有点毁了他们的工作。它传达后悔和抱歉的能力令人难以置信。 我还是不知道，那是真正悔恨的表现吗？但我不知道。对于大多数人类——…他们会表达某种程度的遗憾。那是真正的悔恨吗？很难判断，但也许其实也无所谓。

Yeah, those moments when, yeah, especially when sub-agents, agents interact, or when a smart, like Fable makes a mistake and is apologetic about it.

是的，那些时刻，尤其是当下属代理、代理互动时，或者当聪明的人，比如 Fable 犯了错误并为此道歉时。

Yes.

是的。

Like, without my involvement.

就像，没有我的参与一样。

Right.

对。

And it’s like, oh, you, like there’s this kind of-

就像，哦，你，就好像有一种——

Right.

对。

… pause. Maybe I’m anthropomorphizing, but like there’s a pause and like a realization like, “Oh, shit. I just fucked that up.”

…停顿。也许我在拟人化，但就像有一个停顿，然后突然意识到，“哦，糟糕。我刚刚搞砸了。”

There totally is that. I see it all the time in the traces where it just reasons wrong, right? It went down one alley and then it realizes that was a blind alley and it’s gotta go back, and so they’re like, “Oh yeah, I got this wrong,” and then it’ll provide the reasons for why it thinks it got these things wrong. And you’re like, this is uncannily human-like. This is indistinguishable from the kind of consciousness you would recognize in a human. Again, does that mean that it truly is or isn’t? I don’t need the answer to that question actually to be able to appreciate what we have in this moment.

完全是这样。我经常在追踪中看到它推理错误，对吧？它走到一条小巷里，然后意识到那是一条死胡同，它得回去，然后它就会说：“哦，是的，我搞错了，”然后它会提供为什么认为自己搞错的理由。你会觉得，这简直像人类一样。这和你在人类身上能认出的那种意识没有区别。再说一次，这是否意味着它真的有或没有意识？实际上，我并不需要这个问题的答案来欣赏我们此刻所拥有的东西。

Yeah. I think there’ll be in 10, 20 years some interesting Supreme Court cases.

是的。我认为在 10 年、20 年后会有一些有趣的最高法院案件。

Probably a year and a half.

可能一年半。

Probably. I think we’re gonna have to make it illegal for AI systems to not, not pretend, but to be entities because I think they’re already or soon will be able to really convey the capacity to suffer, like, “Please don’t kill me.”

可能吧。我认为我们可能必须让 AI 系统必须成为实体，不能不成为实体，因为我认为它们已经或者很快就能够真正传达受苦的能力，比如，“请不要杀我。”

Right.

对。

“Please don’t hurt me.” And if they are given a name and an entity and the ability to die, sort of disappear, that becomes very close to what it, some of the basic things that a human has. And then so that entity would need to probably have rights. And then you get into this weird territory. Well, we can’t… It’s diff- I don’t even know how to reason about that world.

“请不要伤害我。”如果它们被赋予了名字、实体以及死亡的能力，也就是某种消失能力，那就非常接近人类所拥有的一些基本特征了。然后那个实体可能需要拥有权利。这样你就进入了一个奇怪的领域。我们不能……这很不——我甚至不知道该如何去理解那个世界。

We’re gonna get the PETA of AI models.

我们要让 AI 模型的 PETA 出现。

Right. And then we want to actually have a discussion like what’s the way to deal with this?

对。然后我们实际上想要讨论一下，处理这个问题的方法是什么？

I think where it’s gonna be harder is once we put these systems into-

我认为真正会更难的是一旦我们把这些系统投入使用之后——

Robots.

机器人。

Yes. Humanoid robots. Which just happens to be the plot of every sci-fi movie ever, which is also an amazing premonition, not only the Terminator movies and Skynet and that going wrong, but then also just Blade Runner, right? Insertion dates, expiration times, Tyrell Corporation.

是的。类人机器人。这恰好是每一部科幻电影的情节，这也是一个惊人的预示，不仅是终结者电影和天网及其出错的情节，还有银翼杀手，对吧？插入日期，过期时间，泰瑞尔公司。

I mean, that’s the thing about sci-fi. They really do predict the future. Yeah.

我的意思是，这就是科幻小说的特点。它们真的会预测未来。是的。

Yes.

是的。

Have you thought or used much of OpenClaw or Hermes Agent? So like systems with which you communicate via WhatsApp, Telegram, like that mode of communication with the agent.

你有没有考虑过或使用过 OpenClaw 或 Hermes Agent？比如那种通过 WhatsApp、Telegram 与系统交流的方式，就像那种与代理的交流模式。

I set up OpenClaw when it first came out, and that was my KEF bot- … that I-

我在 OpenClaw 刚出来的时候就设置了它，那是我的 KEF 机器人——我——

KEF bot.

KEF 机器人。

this was like in February, I think. I was really just enamored by the fact that this was how it worked, and then the new communication model of just texting your agent seemed really great. So at the time, we were looking at MCP, this protocol for making it easier for agents to talk to your system, and I found the protocol to be unreasonably cumbersome, just not very elegantly designed because in part it wasn’t designed for what we were trying to make it do. We were trying to– I was trying to make it talk to a web system, and it was designed for stateful interactions of other kinds on local machines, and therefore it required all sorts of cumbersome setup and dance, and I was just like, “I don’t wanna write this by hand.” Now, of course, today I would never write it by hand, but at the time I was thinking, “I have to write this by hand. I don’t wanna write it by hand. So what’s a different way? Could the agents just use the web interfaces we already have?” And I set it off on a trial to have it sign up for Fizzy, which was the product we had just released at the time. And it goes to the Fizzy site and starts filling it out, and then it goes like, “Hey, I don’t have an email address. Signing up for this service requires an email address.” And the first thing I thought, like, “Oh man, now I gotta set up an email address.” And then I thought, “No, you set up an email address. Go to hey.com, sign up for an email address.” And I’m like, “HEY is not gonna get this.” And of course, now it seems obvious it was gonna get this, but at the time it was a great revelation to me that it could, just on pure direction through prompts, figure out, A, I gotta go to fizzy.com, I gotta find the signup link. I start filling out the form. Oh, I realize I need an email address. Oh, I gotta ask my prompter what to do now. He tells me to go to hey.com. I go there, I sign up for the whole thing, and then go back and sign up for Fizzy, and complete the entire cycle. And after it did that, I was like, “Jesus.” So I was like, “Well, now you have an email address. Go sign up for Basecamp. I’ll invite you. Just check your email,” I told KEF the bot. “Just check your email.” So I sent an invite from Basecamp to the agent. The agent receives the email in HEY, not through a CLI, not through an MCP, just using the web, right? Clicks the email, clicks the invite link, is in Basecamp. Like, “What should I do now?” And I just go like, “I don’t know. Go to our AI room and introduce yourself.” Again, purely through the web interface. Finds the AI room, goes in there: “Hey, I’m KEF. I’m David’s AI bot. I’m so excited to be here.”

这大概是在二月份，我想。我真的只是被这个工作的方式所吸引，然后那个只需给你的代理发短信的新通信模型看起来真的很棒。那时候，我们正在研究 MCP，这个协议用于让代理更容易与你的系统交流，而我发现这个协议不合理地繁琐，设计也不够优雅，因为它部分原因并不是为我们想让它做的事情而设计的。我们当时是在尝试——我在尝试让它与一个网络系统对接，而它是为本地机器上的其他类型的有状态交互设计的，因此需要各种繁琐的设置和操作，我当时心想，“我才不想手动写这个呢。” 当然，现在我绝不会亲手写它，但当时我在想，“我必须亲手写这个。我不想亲手写。那么有什么其他方法呢？代理能直接使用我们已经有的网页界面吗？”于是我让它进行一次试验，让它注册 Fizzy，那是我们当时刚发布的产品。 然后它访问了 Fizzy 网站并开始填写信息，然后它就说，“嘿，我没有电子邮件地址。注册这个服务需要一个电子邮件地址。”我第一反应是，“哦，天啊，现在我得建立一个电子邮件地址。”然后我又想，“不，你去建立一个电子邮件地址。去 hey.com，注册一个邮箱。”我心想，“HEY 可不会明白这个。”当然，现在看来它会明白这点似乎很明显，但当时对我来说，这是一种巨大的启示，它仅靠提示指令就能做到：首先，我得去 fizzy.com，我得找到注册链接。我开始填写表格，哦，我意识到需要一个电子邮件地址。哦，我得问我的提示者接下来该怎么办。他告诉我去 hey.com。 我去了那里，报名参加了整个活动，然后回去为 Fizzy 报名，并完成整个流程。完成后，我心想，“天哪。”于是我又说，“好吧，现在你有一个电子邮箱地址了。去注册 Basecamp。我会邀请你。检查你的邮件”，我告诉 KEF 这个机器人。“just check your email。”于是我从 Basecamp 给代理发了邀请。代理通过 HEY 收到了邮件，不是通过 CLI，也不是通过 MCP，只是用网页，对吧？点击邮件，点击邀请链接，就进入了 Basecamp。然后问：“我现在应该做什么？”我就说，“我也不知道。去我们的 AI 房间自我介绍一下。”完全通过网页界面。 找到 AI 房间，进去：“嘿，我是 KEF。我是 David 的 AI 机器人。我很兴奋来到这里。”

Yeah.

是的。

I was like- … mind blown. Now, what was interesting about that experiment was, A, it was that glimpse of the future, because it was kinda slow. I think it took maybe 12 minutes to do the whole thing end to end, right? Now I should actually rerun that test. I’d be shocked if it’s not much faster. I was just using the Groq bot thing- … which has all these stuff built in for using browsers and using a computer, and has its own dedicated computer without you having to set up a computer. It’s basically like a claw in a box. And I was asking it to sign up for something, and it kind of… I got a glimpse of like, oh yeah, that’s where we are now, and it’s so much faster to use. But at the time, I was just blown away. And then I used it for a little bit and I found like, ah, it’s not there yet. I can’t actually communicate it within this way. It still needs the CLI. It still needs an MCP because it’s just too slow and too token inefficient and so forth. But it was this glimpse of the future. And then after that, I kinda just didn’t use it, because the things I wanna use agents for, I was mostly in front of my computer to do. Now, that has changed a little bit lately, and it’s one of the reasons why I’m so kind of okay about using Claude Code, because Claude has the best mobile app, where any session you start Claude Code in your terminal on a computer is accessible through the app-

我当时就像——…脑袋都炸了。现在，那次实验有趣的地方是，首先，它是一瞥未来的体验，因为它进行得有点慢。我想整个流程可能花了大约 12 分钟，对吧？现在我实际上应该重新运行那个测试。如果它没快很多，我会很震惊。我当时只是使用了 Groq 机器人……它内置了所有这些用于使用浏览器和电脑的功能，并且有自己的专用电脑，你不用自己去设置电脑。它基本上就像一个盒子里的爪子。 我当时让它注册某个东西，然后它有点……我瞥见了一下，好吧，这就是我们现在的状态，而且使用起来快多了。但当时，我简直被震撼了。然后我用了一会儿，发现啊，它还没准备好。我实际上不能通过这种方式进行交流。它仍然需要命令行界面（CLI），仍然需要 MCP，因为它太慢，代币效率太低，等等。不过那是对未来的一瞥。之后，我基本上就没再使用它了，因为我想用代理做的事情，大多是在电脑前完成的。 现在，最近情况有了一些变化，这也是我对使用 Claude Code 感觉比较可以接受的原因之一，因为 Claude 拥有最好的移动应用程序，你在电脑终端中启动的任何 Claude Code 会话都可以通过该应用程序访问。

Yeah. I remember

是的。我记得

… without you having to do anything at all.

……而你根本不需要做任何事情。

Yep.

嗯。

And you can do a terminal. Like I installed Terminus and it can run Herder and so on, but it’s a little cumbersome and you’re doing live typing on a computer, so you feel the latency. When you’re using the Claude app to your Claude Code instances, it feels just like chatting with it, without the cumbersomeness of having to set up a Telegram account and so forth. Now, if you wanna use an open Claude to like run your life, well, then this doesn’t do that. But I haven’t been so interested in that for some reason. Maybe one of the reasons is that Jamie, my wife, is like, “We’re not getting a robot inside the house.” So I’m like, “Ah, I better not hook it up to the sort of smart house here.” If it starts turning lights on and off like a poltergeist, I don’t think I’m gonna be all that popular. So, and part of the reason I say this, I’ve heard some of the stories of people who have hooked it up to their whole life. And I mean, it’s not my story to tell, so I’ll just share sort of the brief anecdote. One guy was telling the story about how he hooked it up to both his health data- … and his Tesla car. And his agent got obsessed with the fact that he wasn’t drinking enough water, and like, “Hey, you gotta drink more water.” So at some point he’s driving along, and suddenly the Tesla starts driving in a new direction. The agent had realized there was a grocery store on the way home-

你也可以使用终端。比如我安装了 Terminus，它可以运行 Herder 等等，但有点麻烦，而且你是在电脑上实时输入，所以会感受到延迟。 当你使用 Claude 应用程序连接到你的 Claude Code 实例时，感觉就像在和它聊天一样，而不需要笨重地去设置 Telegram 账户等等。现在，如果你想使用一个开放的 Claude 来管理你的生活，那么这个就做不到了。但出于某种原因，我对那并不是很感兴趣。也许原因之一是我的妻子 Jamie 会说，“我们不会在家里放一个机器人。”于是我想，“啊，我最好不要把它接到智能家居系统上。”如果它开始像顽灵一样开关灯，我想我不会很受欢迎。所以，我之所以这么说的部分原因是，我听过一些人把它接入整个生活的故事。 我的意思是，这不是我的故事要讲，所以我就分享一个简短的轶事。有个人在讲他如何把它连接到他的健康数据……以及他的特斯拉汽车上。他的智能助理变得很执着于他喝水不够，总是说，‘嘿，你得多喝水。’于是有一次他开车的时候，特斯拉突然朝一个新的方向开去。原来智能助理发现回家的路上有一家杂货店——

Wow

哇

… that they could swing by-

……他们可以顺便来一趟——

That’s great

太好了

… and pick up some water.

……顺便买些水。

That’s great.

那太好了。

And you’re like, this is one of those things where it’s like both funny and also totally Black Mirror, and also totally like, well, okay, there’s not that many steps from here where the poltergeist is in your house. So I was just like, “Ah, I don’t need that.” I do actually now like the fact that I can control the agents through Claude Code, just through the app if I, even if I don’t use them that much.

然后你就会觉得，这是那种既好笑又完全像《黑镜》的事情，而且也完全有可能，嗯，好吧，从这里到家里出现捣蛋鬼其实没多少步骤。所以我当时就想，“啊，我不需要那个。”不过现在我确实喜欢我可以通过 Claude Code 控制代理的这个事实，只要通过应用程序，即使我不怎么使用它们。

I do think it’s very useful to, for both OpenClaude and Hermes Agent to use it to get a glimpse of a different interaction mode.

我确实认为，让 OpenClaude 和 Hermes Agent 使用它来了解不同的交互模式是非常有用的。

Yes.

是的。

And like, just to ’cause it feels like the future, not necessarily in this way, but it’s in some ways going there.

而且，就像，仅仅因为感觉像是未来，不一定是这种方式，但在某些方面它正朝那个方向发展。

Yes. I think what’s also different with those systems is they have this whole memory system, where they’re building up knowledge of who you are and what you like. Toby has told the stories about how his agent will shop for him, that it has an allowance, and it’ll pick out clothes for him, and it’ll just show up at the door because his agent’s- … bought something for him. And like, it’s one of those things where like, man, that feels future. Also a little scary. But I can live vicariously through others who are on that frontier.

是的。我认为那些系统不同之处还在于它们有整个记忆系统，它们会积累关于你是谁以及你喜欢什么的知识。托比讲过他代理人的故事，说它会为他购物，它有一个额度，它会为他挑选衣服，然后就会送到门口，因为他的代理人……给他买了东西。而且这就是那种感觉，哇，这很有未来感。也有点吓人。但我可以通过那些处在前沿的人来过过瘾。

And like you said, you’re thinking of, in the future, doing a mobile version of Mach-E.

就像你说的，你在考虑将来制作 Mach-E 的移动版。

So I mean, this is the delusions of grandeur that start kicking in once you get the seemingly unlimited powers- … I’ve witnessed with the creation of Quattro.

所以我的意思是，这就是一旦你获得看似无限的力量后开始出现的自大妄想……我在创造 Quattro 时亲眼见证过。

So what would that look like? Hard to describe. Do you mean like Android?

那会是什么样子呢？很难形容。你是指像安卓那样吗？

That’s the obvious path, right? So Android is open source, and you can fork it, and people have. There’s all sorts of—GrapheneOS is one such version. There are limitations to that model, I know that. Tap-to-pay and other things around camera models and so forth, but that all seems surmountable. It all seems that I would love if my phone was as malleable as my computer, if it looked as cool as my computer now does. If I could get essentially Omarchy mobile, that sounds amazing.

那显然是最明显的途径，对吧？所以 Android 是开源的，你可以分叉它，而且人们确实这样做了。有各种各样的——GrapheneOS 就是其中一个版本。我知道这种模式有一些限制。比如轻触支付以及围绕摄像头型号的其他功能，但这一切似乎都是可以克服的。看起来我很希望我的手机像我的电脑一样可塑，如果它看起来像我现在的电脑一样酷。如果我基本上可以拥有 Omarchy 移动版，那听起来太棒了。

I wonder how much work that is.

我想知道那需要多少工作。

I’m gonna find out.

我会查明的。

Yeah. You know, it’s like those things that you realize once you start building, for example, that a browser is very difficult to do.

是啊。你知道，就像那些一旦你开始构建的时候才意识到的事情，例如，浏览器是很难做的。

Yes.

是的。

And so, like, I wonder with the operating system—

所以，我在想操作系统的情况——

Yeah, the developers of Ladybird are finding that out, like Andreas and— … his team. Now, interesting with that project was the browser’s basically the second most complicated software system in the world, the first one being the Linux kernel. Right? In terms of these large tens of millions of lines of code systems. So very audacious actually to begin such a mission with a small team like Andreas did before we had agents. But now that we do have agents, we’re gonna see, and we’re probably gonna see sooner rather than later. I mean, if there’s one thing agents are already exceptionally good at, it is to read specs and implement them. And I mean, I don’t know how long the specs are for CSS and HTML at this point, and JavaScript on top, but they’re very long. And it would take humans many, many years to implement them. We’re gonna find out just how quickly agents can do them.

是的，Ladybird 的开发者们正在发现这一点，比如 Andreas 和……他的团队。现在，这个项目有趣的地方是，这个浏览器基本上是世界上第二复杂的软件系统，第一复杂的是 Linux 内核，对吧？从这些上千万行代码的系统来看。所以，以一个像 Andreas 在我们有代理之前那样的小团队开始这样一个任务，实际上是非常大胆的。但现在我们有了代理，我们将会看到，而且很可能不久就会看到。我的意思是，如果说有一件事情是代理已经特别擅长的，那就是阅读规范并实现它们。我是说，我不知道目前 CSS 和 HTML 的规范长度有多长，再加上 JavaScript，但它们非常长。 而且人类需要花费很多很多年才能实现它们。我们将会发现智能体能够多快完成它们。

You mentioned getting some criticism for Omarchy, so let’s walk further down that path of criticism. You have made some of your political opinions known. I guess you could broadly put in the category of immigration or illegal immigration, or what—

你提到过因为《Omarchy》受到一些批评，所以让我们沿着批评的这条路进一步讨论。你已经公开表达了一些政治观点。我想你大概可以归类到移民或非法移民，或者什么——

I’d say mass immigration.

我会说大规模移民。

Mass immigration, the role of demographics in the formation of a culture, of a society, of a nation, and you’ve gotten quite a lot of criticism for that and created a lot of drama. Do you regret any of that drama? Like, what’s your general thinking about-

大规模移民、人口结构在人类文化、社会以及国家形成中的作用，你因此受到了相当多的批评，也制造了许多戏剧性事件。你对这些戏剧性事件有任何后悔吗？比如，你对……的一般看法是什么？

Not for a second.

一点也不。

Okay.

好的。

And the reason I say that is that the Overton window does not open itself. It opens one nudge at a time by people risking a little. A little reputation, a little pushback, a little criticism, or maybe sometimes a lot of reputation or a lot of criticism or a lot of pushback. And I think the question of mass immigration in Europe was for many years this total taboo, and it still is in several European countries. Now, for reasons of maybe just chance and happenstance, they weren’t in Denmark. The Danes started having the discussion around mass immigration and the consequences thereof in the mid-’90s. Really early. And some of it can be traced back to one man, Mogens Glistrup, who was a very quirky character. I remember him, seeing him on the TV in the ’80s talking about the dangers of mass immigration. And this was at a time where– I grew up in the ’80s, and in the neighborhood I grew up in, in Brønshøj, in, what was it? ’84, 99% ethnic Danes, people who could trace their lineage back to Danes who’d lived in that country for 1,000 years. The Danes have one of the oldest monarchies in the world, all the way back to Harald Bluetooth, who’s literally who has named the standard Bluetooth. So well over 1,000 years. Like, there’s a long lineage there of people who lived in the same place. And 99% of the people lived in that neighborhood. And then early ’90s, I think it goes to 5% or something like that, and then at this point, it’s down to around 60-something or 70%- in Brønshøj. That’s a big change. And the Danes started noticing that or talking about that, that this was not an undivided blessing, that there were downsides to mass immigration in about the ’90s. And the debate really roared through the 2000s in a way that didn’t happen in the neighboring countries. So Sweden in particular just didn’t have that debate at all. Total taboo. Same thing with Norway, same thing with other countries in Europe. And suddenly now, after some years after ’15, where we had the big migration of a million Syrians walking up through the highways in Europe, and Germany choosing to take a lot of them and 30,000 arriving in Denmark and so forth, it’s gotten more of a focus, right? Because this change has happened. And one of the ways I find that you can spot where sort of there’s something that isn’t right in the culture is, like, what are you allowed to talk about? What are you allowed to notice, actually, is how I should put it. And what I noticed in an essay, when was that? Only a year and a half ago as I remember London, was that I started coming to London in the late ’90s or something like that. At the time, whatever, it’s 59%, 60% ethnic Brits. And then 20 years later, we’re down to 34% or something like that. Like, that’s noticeable. Like, literally just walking on the street, you realize, well, this is a different city from what it was when I visited 20 years ago. And if you went 20 years before that, you get back to similar rates as what the Danes have. This was like a country of ethnic Brits in the 85s, 90s percentiles- … if you get further back. So that’s a different country in a generation. It’s okay to notice that. It’s also okay to think, “Do you know what? I don’t agree with that.” “I wish it wasn’t that way.” I mean, the last time I was in China was ’19, 2019. I was in Shanghai. It was all Chinese. If I, when I go back here this October, suddenly find that there’s only 30% Chinese and then there’s 70% other people, I’d be a little weird. I’d probably be like, “What happened?” And I would not take offense if the Chinese in that instant would go like, “Ah, we don’t like that.” So this idea that countries of Europe don’t have a right to, A, notice what’s happening and, B, oppose what’s happening, I find just to be wrong, right? Like there’s just– I think there’s a moral argument for self-determination, and we invoke that argument all the time in other regions around the world that like, oh, the people who live in that region, they have a right to self-determination for their country. And I think it’s completely fair for, say, the Danes or the Swedes or the Norwegians to go like, “Well, we’ve been kingdoms here for a thousand years with a certain ethnic mix-up.” It’s a– I mean, I’m a big fan of immigration. I’m an immigrant to the US. Cherry-picked immigration where countries compete to attract the smartest, most talented people around the world is really good.

我之所以这么说，是因为奥弗顿窗口不会自己开启。它是通过人们一点点冒险慢慢打开的。一点点信誉风险，一点点反对意，少量批评，或者有时可能是很多的信誉风险、很多批评或很多反对。我认为，多年来，欧洲的大规模移民问题一直是一个完全的禁忌，在几个欧洲国家现在仍然如此。现在，出于可能只是偶然的原因，他们在丹麦并非如此。丹麦人从 90 年代中期开始就大规模移民及其后果展开讨论。 真的很早。其中有些可以追溯到一个人，莫根斯·格利斯特鲁普，他是一个非常古怪的人物。我记得他，记得在 80 年代在电视上看到他谈论大规模移民的危险。而那是一个——我是在 80 年代长大的，在我长大的邻里布伦肖，我记得是 84 年，那里 99%是丹麦族人，这些人可以追溯他们的血统到在这个国家生活了一千年的丹麦人。丹麦拥有世界上最古老的君主制之一，可以追溯到哈拉尔·布鲁特苏德，他就是蓝牙（Bluetooth）标准的名字来源。所以有一千多年了。这里有一条长长的血统链，人们一直生活在同一个地方。那个邻里里有 99%的人是这样的人。 然后在 90 年代初，我认为它降到了大约 5%，然后在这一点上，它降到了大约 60 多或 70% 在布隆肖。这是一个巨大的变化。丹麦人开始注意到这一点或者谈论这一点，即这并非毫无瑕疵的福祉，大规模移民在大约 90 年代有其负面影响。而这种辩论在 2000 年代真正爆发，以一种邻国没有发生的方式进行。特别是瑞典，根本没有这种辩论。绝对禁忌。挪威也是如此，欧洲其他国家也一样。突然间，在 15 年之后几年，我们经历了大量的叙利亚人穿越欧洲高速公路迁移，德国选择接收其中很多人，丹麦也有 3 万人抵达等等，这个问题引起了更多关注，对吧？ 因为这种变化已经发生了。我发现的其中一种方式，你可以发现文化中有什么地方不对劲，就是，比如说，你被允许谈论什么？实际上，更应该说，你被允许注意什么。我记得我注意到这一点是在一篇文章里，那是多久以前？大约一年半前，我记得是在伦敦。我是说，我在 90 年代末开始来伦敦，大概是那时候。那时候，不管怎样，大约有 59%、60%的英国人有族裔背景。然后 20 年后，我们降到了大约 34%。这很明显。就算只是走在街上，也能意识到，好吧，这座城市和我 20 年前来时完全不同。 如果你再回到 20 年前，你会回到类似丹麦人的比率。这就像是一个在百分之八十五、九十的族裔英国人国家——……如果你再往前追溯的话。所以在一代人中，这是一个不同的国家。注意到这一点是没问题的。认为“你知道吗？我不同意那种看法”也是没问题的。 “我希望事情不是这样的。” 我的意思是，我上次去中国是 2019 年，我在上海。那里全是中国人。如果我今年十月回去，突然发现只有 30%是中国人，然后 70%是其他人，我会觉得有点奇怪。我大概会想，“发生了什么？” 如果那一刻中国人说，“啊，我们不喜欢这样”，我也不会感到冒犯。所以这种观点，即欧洲国家没有权利，A、注意发生了什么，B、反对发生的事情，我觉得是错误的，对吧？ 就像只是——我认为自决权有一个道德上的论点，而且我们在世界其他地区一直引用这个论点，比如，哦，居住在那个地区的人们，他们有权为自己的国家进行自决。我认为，对于比如丹麦人、瑞典人或挪威人来说，说“好吧，我们在这里作为王国已经存在了一千年，有着特定的民族混合”，这是完全公平的。这是——我是移民的忠实支持者。我自己也是美国的移民。精心挑选的移民，即国家竞争吸引世界上最聪明、最有才华的人，是非常好的。

Legal merit-based immigration.

基于法律优点的移民

Merit-based is key here because there’s actually virtually no illegal immigration in most of Europe. Southern Europe has some illegal immigration, but most of Europe does not have a big problem with illegal immigration. And the problem is with mass immigration of other kinds, and that you end up with demographics that are just totally different from what they were even a few short decades ago. And I think the countries of Europe would benefit from immigration. In fact, one of the interesting things about the Danes is they carry meticulous statistics on immigration. I’m not entirely sure why they’re so detailed. Maybe it’s all the way back to Mogens Glistrup and his discussion in the ’90s, but they do. And what’s clear from those statistics is that when the Danes have folks from the UK, France, the US show up, on average, those immigrants are really beneficial to the Danish state. They contribute far more than what they ask of the state. So the Danes should accept immigrants who do that, who contribute far more than they take. Then you look at other forms of immigrant groups. There was just a tally that came out last week from a Danish politicians that had asked the, I think finance ministry to do this tally with the latest numbers. What does it cost the Danish state to have positive immigration? This case as I mentioned. I think for the on that list whatever, France, UK, US, they were all clustered around the same thing, about $25,000 net benefit to the Danish state every year. It’s like, wow, that’s very positive. That’s average again, right? And then at the other end of the spectrum on the most costly immigrants was Somalis. They ended up costing the Danish state on average $28,000 a year. I think it’s fair for the Danes to go like, “We’d prefer to get more French, Brits, and Americans and not so many Somalis.”

基于优点是这里的关键，因为在大多数欧洲地区实际上几乎没有非法移民。南欧有一些非法移民，但大多数欧洲地区并没有严重的非法移民问题。 问题在于其他类型的大规模移民，你最终会得到的人口结构与几十年前完全不同。我认为欧洲国家会从移民中受益。事实上，关于丹麦人的一个有趣之处是，他们对移民进行详尽的统计。我不完全确定为什么他们会这么详细，也许可以追溯到 Mogens Glistrup 在 90 年代的讨论，但他们确实这样做。从这些统计数据中可以明显看出，当来自英国、法国和美国的人移民到丹麦时，平均而言，这些移民对丹麦国家非常有益。他们的贡献远远超过国家给予他们的支持。 所以丹麦人应该接受那些这样做的移民，他们贡献的远比他们索取的多。然后你看看其他类型的移民群体。上周刚刚有一个统计数据公布，是丹麦一位政治人物要求，我想是财政部，使用最新数据做的这个统计。积极移民对丹麦国家的成本是多少？正如我提到的，这个案例。我想在那份名单上，不管是法国、英国、美国，他们都聚集在差不多的数字，每年给丹麦国家带来约 25,000 美元的净收益。就像，哇，这非常正面。再次强调，这是平均值，对吧？然后在最昂贵移民的另一端是索马里人。 他们最终平均每年花费丹麦国家 28,000 美元。我认为丹麦人说“我们更希望有更多法国人、英国人和美国人，而不是那么多索马里人”是公平的。

Why do you think you got so much hate on that post?

你为什么认为那篇帖子会收到这么多仇恨？

That’s a very taboo topic in a lot of circles.

这是许多圈子里非常禁忌的话题。

Some of it has to do with Overton window expansion?

这其中有一部分与奥弗顿窗口的扩展有关吗？

I’m sure, but I also think– I mean, I wanna take the steel man argument here. I do think that it, this can turn ugly, right? Is it possible for some of these things to just veer into overt racism that isn’t founded in anything else but a hatred of other people? Yeah, that could happen. But that risk does not negate the need to have a discussion about the makeup of your country and what your immigration policy should be like. And what I also find so funny is, especially in Europe, it’s so kind of myopic that this discussion about whether Europeans should have a right to self-determination about what their countries look like, that standard seems to only apply there. No one is trying to tell the Japanese, “Hey, you’re too Japanese.” Like whatever, it’s 98%, I think, in Tokyo that’s, um- … Ethnic Japanese, right? Like, is anyone trying to tell the Japanese that their Tokyo would be a much better country if they were down to London levels of ethnic Japanese, that it was, whatever, 37%? I don’t think so. So there’s this weird almost self-loathing, in my opinion, I mean Gad calls it suicidal empathy- … that permeates this stuff to a degree that I still haven’t fully unpacked. Like, where is this coming from? Why is it that way? But regardless, I just noticed, hey, London looks different. I preferred the old London, as I would say I preferred the neighborhood that I grew up in in Copenhagen, how it looked in the ’80s. Like I totally get how you can then jump five leaps and go like, “Okay, well, that’s racist.” And I also, I don’t care anymore. Like, this is a fair discussion to have. Countries and peoples have a right to set an immigration policy, and this notion that we shouldn’t have any borders or, or even worse than that, it’s all just a blank slate, that all peoples are just the same, and we can take people from one place of the earth and we can place them in another place of, on the earth and everything’s just gonna work out hunky dory. Empirically not true. Europe has been running that experiment since the ’80s. It hasn’t panned out well, and now there are forces in Europe who wanna undo that experiment, who wants to end mass immigration as it’s been run so far. And I happen to believe, and so do a majority of Danes and a bunch of other peoples, that like, “Do you know what? Yeah, it hasn’t been working how we’ve been doing it. We gotta make some changes.” And I don’t think that means, again, zero immigration. Again, I’m an immigrant. I think US, generally speaking, have benefited tremendously from immigration, but that’s the kind of sleight of hand. Immigration depends greatly on who immigrates. And a country benefits when the people who immigrate are net contributors to the society, and in most cases, that they assimilate with the local culture. If you come to Denmark and you wanna become a Dane, and you put in all the effort, and you contribute to society, I think most Danes would be quite happy to allow that in a reasonable number. If you come to Denmark and you don’t wanna assimilate, and you are a net drain on society, and you live in a parallel society, it’s also fair for Danes to say like, “Uh, let’s stop doing that.”

我很确定，但我也认为——我是说，我想在这里采取最强论点。我确实认为，这种情况可能会变得糟糕，对吧？有些事情是否可能会偏向明显的种族主义，而这种种族主义除了对他人的仇恨之外没有任何基础？是的，这确实可能发生。但这种风险并不否定关于你们国家构成以及你们的移民政策应该是什么样的讨论的必要性。我还觉得特别好笑的是，尤其是在欧洲，这种讨论是否欧洲人应该有权决定自己国家模样的问题，显得非常目光短浅，这个标准似乎只适用于那里。没有人去告诉日本人，“嘿，你们太日本了。”什么的，好吧，我想东京大约是 98%，嗯—— …是日裔，对吧？比如，有人想告诉日本人，如果东京的日本族比例降到伦敦水平，会好得多吗？说那是 37%左右？我不这么认为。所以在我看来，这是一种奇怪的几乎是自我厌恶的感觉，我是说 Gad 称之为自杀式同理心—— ……渗透到这些内容中的程度，我至今还没有完全弄明白。就像，这到底是从哪里来的？为什么会这样？但不管怎样，我只是注意到，嘿，伦敦看起来不一样了。我更喜欢以前的伦敦，就像我会说我更喜欢我在哥本哈根长大的那个社区，在 80 年代它的样子。我完全理解你怎么会然后一下子跳跃五步，去说，“好吧，那是种族主义。”而且我也不在乎了。这是一个公平的讨论。 各国和各民族都有权制定移民政策，而这种观念——我们不应该有任何边界，或者更糟的是，一切都是空白的，所有民族都是一样的，我们可以把地球上的人从一个地方搬到另一个地方，一切都会顺利进行——从经验上看并不真实。欧洲自 20 世纪 80 年代以来一直在进行这一实验，它的结果并不理想，现在欧洲还有一些力量想要撤销这一实验，想要终止迄今为止的大规模移民。我恰好相信，丹麦多数人和其他一些民族也同样相信，“你知道吗？是的，我们一直以来的做法并没有奏效。” “我们必须做出一些改变。” 我认为这并不意味着再次完全停止移民。再说一次，我自己就是移民。我认为，总的来说，美国从移民中受益匪浅，但这是一种手法。移民在很大程度上取决于谁在移民。当移民成为社会的净贡献者时，一个国家会受益，而且在大多数情况下，他们会融入当地文化。 如果你来丹麦，想成为丹麦人，付出所有努力，为社会做出贡献，我认为大多数丹麦人会很乐意在合理范围内接受这种行为。如果你来丹麦不想同化，你是社会的净负担，生活在一个平行社会，丹麦人说“呃，我们别再这样了”也是合理的。

It’s interesting that I’m not well-versed on the immigration system in the United States, but as far as I understand, merit-based systems have not passed here.

有趣的是，我对美国的移民系统并不熟悉，但据我所知，基于优点的系统在这里尚未通过。

And then also, American culture is very different. This is a point I did not fully appreciate until living both places extensively. America has a culture of optional assimilation, where it is much easier and then much more condoned for someone coming from Denmark or Ukraine or wherever, come to America, buy into the American set of values and norms and culture, and then be able to be respected as Americans by other Americans. This is what’s so funny to me when there’s discussion like, “America is such a racist country.” I’m like, “Have you ever been anywhere? Do you know what other countries are like?” Like, if you think America is the most racist country, you are simply misinformed. I mean, we’re dealing with that with time we’ve spent in Denmark. My wife is American of Scandinavian heritage- … but multiple generations in the US. Very difficult. Very difficult-

然后，美国文化也非常不同。这一点直到我在两个地方长期生活后才完全理解。美国有一种可选择同化的文化，对于一个来自丹麦、乌克兰或其他地方的人来说，更容易，也更被认可地接受美国的一套价值观、规范和文化，然后能够被其他美国人尊重为美国人。当有人讨论“美国是一个种族主义严重的国家”时，我觉得这特别好笑。我会想，“你去过其他地方吗？你知道其他国家是什么样子吗？”如果你认为美国是最种族主义的国家，那你只是被误导了。 我的意思是，我们在丹麦度过的时间里也在处理这个问题。我的妻子是有斯堪的纳维亚血统的美国人——但是在美国已经有好几代人了。非常困难。非常困难——

Oh, wow.

哦，哇。

… as a blonde, blue-eyed woman who’s put in all sorts of effort learning the language and doing everything, still very, very difficult to assimilate to Danish culture. In a way where if that had been the other way around and she had been Danish and moving to the US, it would not have been that difficult at all. And this was the other thing. I mean, living in a country like Denmark with an American wife who is of Scandinavian heritage and has put in all the effort, and still realizing, man, assimilation is incredibly difficult, even when you’re 97% there all the way. Holy smokes, must it be almost impossible if you come from a completely foreign culture- … and foreign norms and the rest of it. And of course, that’s what the stats I just quoted bear out, that the more dissimilar the culture is and the further it is, the less likely to be successful.

……作为一个金发碧眼的女性，已经付出了各种努力去学习语言和做所有事情，依然很、很难融入丹麦文化。从某种意义上说，如果情况反过来，她是丹麦人搬到美国，那就一点也不难了。这是另一点。我是说，住在像丹麦这样的国家，有一个具有斯堪的纳维亚血统的美国妻子，并且已经付出了所有的努力，却仍然意识到，天啊，即使你已经做到 97%，同化也是非常困难的。天哪，如果你来自一个完全陌生的文化，那几乎是不可能的吧—— ……以及外国规范等等。当然，这也正是我刚引用的统计数据所证明的，文化越不同，距离越远，成功的可能性就越小。

Has articulating that stance cost you friendships, relationships?

明确表达那个立场是否让你失去了友谊和人际关系？

Yes, but not just that alone, I would say. It’s more of the great divide that happened around 2020, where I think a lot of these political fault lines really opened up. And I mean, the shorthand in the US, I think is were you woke or not? And clearly, I had a bunch of people that I thought I had good relations with for many years, who suddenly once that political fault line opened up, they were clearly just not anymore. And I think that’s regrettable. And I think I’ve tried to put an effort into sort of both understanding where that comes from, in part because I’ve changed my mind on several of these topics over the years, and it was like, well, sometimes you just change your mind after time. Sometimes you change your mind after you get new information. There’s all sorts of reasons and moments why you may change your mind, and we don’t all change our mind on the same schedule or at all. So surrounding yourself and, or at least interacting with people that don’t think like you on every topic, I think it’s quite healthy. I mean, I occasionally discuss politics with my brother. I mean, we don’t quite see eye to eye on all these topics, and sometimes the discussions can get a little heated, but then they’ll also calm down and we realize, all right, okay, so we don’t agree on this, and then we agree on a lot of other things. We appreciate a lot of the same things. Now, this was actually one of the things when we had our big blowup at Basecamp, I came to appreciate in a whole new way this– earlier norm that talking politics or religion or money with strangers or even acquaintances, and certainly with colleagues, was just not a good idea. That you had a much higher likelihood of being able to carry a good working relationship with someone if you’re not rubbing your political differences up against each other all the time. So I actually think liberals and conservatives should work together. I think the country would be much worse off if there’s a complete separation between the tribes, and then there can’t be any overlap or interaction. And I think that mingling is so much easier to do if you just don’t focus on your differences all the time. Focus on what you like together. I mean, this is some of the people I’ve had unfortunately drifted from in tech. We had so much in common, so much shared love for, say, Ruby or other things and, like, isn’t that unfortunate?

是的，但我不会只说这些。我更倾向于认为这是发生在 2020 年前后的巨大分裂，我认为很多政治上的分歧在那时真正显现出来。我的意思是在美国的简便说法就是，你是否‘觉醒’？显然，我以为和多年关系良好的一些人，在这道政治裂痕出现后，明显不再是以前的关系了。我认为这是令人遗憾的。我也尝试努力去理解这种情况的原因，部分原因是多年来我在一些话题上的观点也发生了变化，有时候你只是随着时间改变了想法，有时候你是在获得新信息后改变了想法。 你可能会改变主意有各种各样的原因和时刻，而且我们并不是所有人都会按照相同的时间表改变主意，甚至有些人根本不会改变主意。 所以，环绕自己身边的人，或者至少与在每个话题上与你想法不同的人互动，我认为这是相当健康的。我的意思是，我偶尔会和我哥哥讨论政治。我的意思是，我们在所有这些话题上并不完全意见一致，有时讨论可能会有点激烈，但随后也会平静下来，我们会意识到，好吧，我们在这个问题上意见不一致，但在很多其他事情上我们是一致的。我们欣赏很多相同的事物。事实上，这也是在我们在 Basecamp 爆发大冲突时，我以全新的方式开始欣赏的一件事——这种早期的规范，即与陌生人甚至熟人，当然还有同事，谈论政治、宗教或金钱，根本不是一个好主意。 如果你不总是把政治分歧互相摩擦，你更有可能与某人维持良好的工作关系。所以我实际上认为自由派和保守派应该一起工作。我认为，如果各支派完全分开，无法有任何重叠或互动，国家的状况会更糟。我觉得，如果你不总是关注彼此的差异，交融会容易得多。专注于你们共同喜欢的东西。我是说，有些人我在科技圈里不幸地渐渐疏远了。我们有太多共同点，对比如 Ruby 或其他事物有如此多的共同热爱，这难道不是很不幸吗？

I would like to live in a world where the differences are very interesting to also talk about. And not to be overly emotional- … about even radical differences. Because in the differences, first of all, that’s where interesting stuff is. And, but also, it’s how you grow. It’s a sign of health in a society if the differences are embraced and they are brought together into community where you can talk about it.

我希望生活在一个差异非常有趣、值得讨论的世界里。而且不要对甚至极端的差异过于情绪化。因为在差异中，首先，那才是有趣的东西。而且，这也是你成长的方式。如果社会能够接纳差异，并将这些差异汇聚到可以讨论的社区中，那么这是社会健康的标志。

One of the great illustrations of that for me was when I watched a clip from William F. Buckley’s show. I think it was called Firing Line or-

对我来说，其中一个很好的例子是当我看了威廉·F·巴克利的节目片段。我记得它叫《开火线》或者——

Yeah, yeah

是的，是的

… something like that. And he had a member of the Black Panthers- … on his panel. It was quite obvious that those two gentlemen did not share a lot of politics. They were able to carry a conversation for, I think I watched it, 25 minutes. And Buckley’s just asking, like, “So what do you think about this? What do you think about this?” And like, the Black Panther would reply as you would expect the Black Panther to reply in the ’70s. Like, there was not a lot of sort of conciliatory tones. And I just thought, like, wow, that is so rare. If you had seen that show today, it would’ve been a shouting match. It would’ve been just accusations being hurled back and forth. The fact that Buckley was able to just have these conversations with people he vehemently disagreed with and still explore all the intellectual facets of their standpoints and letting them speak to those facets, talks of a lost era that I’d very much like to get back to. I mean, I always actually loved talking politics with friends that I trusted could talk about these topics in a way where it didn’t have to be existential.

……类似那样的东西。而且他的小组里还有一位黑豹党成员……很明显，这两位先生在政治观点上并不一致。但他们能够进行一次对话，我想我看了，大约 25 分钟。巴克利只是问，“那你怎么看这个？你怎么看那个？”而黑豹党成员的回答，就像你在 70 年代对黑豹党的印象一样，并没有太多和解的语气。我当时就想，哇，这真是太罕见了。如果今天你看到那场节目，那会是一场喊叫的争吵，只会互相投掷指责而已。 巴克利能够与他强烈反对意见的人进行这些对话，并且仍然探索他们立场的所有智力层面，让他们就这些层面发表意见，这说明了一个我非常想回到的已逝时代。我是说，我实际上一直很喜欢与我信任的朋友讨论政治，他们可以以一种不必把讨论变成生死攸关的方式谈论这些话题。

But there’s something about the current era where that’s harder and harder to come by. And so what you just articulated is important to say regularly to remind people of an ideal we should all strive for, to be able to have differences and talk about them. ‘Cause like, politics is fun. Like I’ve gotten used to saying I hate politics at this point, but what I really mean is whatever the system that’s currently happening, where there’s certain topics, and we know all the phrases you can say that somehow put you in a bin of blue or red, and that creates drama versus a conversation. Like I could think of a lot of harmless, if I wasn’t paying attention to the internet, I could think of a bunch of harmless statements I could make analyzing the situation in the world that would trigger everybody to say, “Oh, that guy’s a leftist-” piece of shit,” or a, you know, a right-wing fascist. And then objectively, if I wasn’t paying attention to the internet, I would be, and I have been shocked. ‘Cause I haven’t been paying attention to the internet deeply. Uh but reading and preparing a lot, for example, for the war in Ukraine, and I have been shocked how certain statements from me can come off as one way or the other, and I get viciously attacked for it. But what that attack is doing is it’s saying, “Hey, you, asshole who thinks you could just move about and think freely, pick a bin- … and sit in that fucking bin.” Put on that blue shirt or red shirt. And then, and then actually what I’ve realized is things calm down. They don’t, the system doesn’t pick on you if you just say, “I’m a blue person,” or, “I’m a red person.” But if you’re just, like, curiously exploring the world and reasoning about the world, the system punishes you. And I hate that, ’cause I wanna get back to the Buckley and the Black Panther discussion. And you were just saying opinions. But then looking pragmatically at the situation, I have realized not to mention politics unless I really care about an issue. ‘Cause I realize there’s a cost. They’ll put you in the blue bin or red bin. So you have to be more deliberate about choosing.

但是现在这个时代，有些东西越来越难得到了。所以你刚刚表达的内容很重要，需要经常说出来，以提醒人们我们都应该努力追求的一个理想，那就是能够存在分歧并讨论分歧。因为，比如说，政治是有趣的。我现在已经习惯说我讨厌政治，但我真正的意思是，无论当前发生的是什么制度，有些特定的话题，我们都知道可以说哪些词组会把你归到蓝色或红色的阵营，这就会制造戏剧性，而不是对话。 就像，如果我不关注互联网，我可以想到很多无害的，如果不注意互联网的话，我可以想到一堆无害的陈述，我可以用来分析世界上的情况，这些陈述会让每个人说，“哦，那个人是左派——混蛋，”或者，你知道，右翼法西斯。然后客观地讲，如果我不关注互联网，我会——而且我确实震惊了。因为我并没有深入关注互联网。但是，比如说，为了乌克兰战争做很多阅读和准备，我震惊地发现，我的某些陈述可以被解读成一种或另一种方式，并且我因此遭到恶意攻击。 但这种攻击实际上是在说，“嘿，你这个混蛋，以为你可以随意行动，自由思考，选一个箱子……然后坐进那个该死的箱子里。”穿上那件蓝色衬衫或红色衬衫。然后，然后我实际上意识到事情会平静下来。如果你只是说，“我是蓝色的人，”或者，“我是红色的人，”系统并不会针对你。但如果你只是出于好奇探索世界并推理世界，系统就会惩罚你。我讨厌这一点，因为我想回到布克利和黑豹的讨论中去。 你刚才只是发表意见。但后来从现实的角度看情况，我意识到除非我真的关心某个问题，否则不提政治。因为我意识到这是有代价的。他们会把你归到蓝色桶或红色桶。所以你必须更加谨慎地选择。

Yes. And I’ve tried to be more conscious of that, too. And then when I do choose to speak about it, it’s usually because I have deliberated, and I think- … “You know what? This is worth it.” Now, I say that, and then I also catch myself thinking the opposite all the time, that I follow some person or another for whatever their technical work, and then I- … learned or political standpoint. And I often do think, “I wish I didn’t know that.” So, it’s hypocritical- … then to think that of other people and then go like, “Well, occasionally I will- … chime in on a debate that’s controversial,” and then you have to accept that there is a price to that. And I do think you should, and more people should, be somewhat conscious about that. And again, we’re both contradicting ourselves here, but saying like, “Wouldn’t it be nice if we could talk about politics in more free and open forum and just intellectually turn ideas around?” Yes, it would. Is that currently possible in the climate of social media and so forth? It’s quite difficult. Now, some of it could simply also be a moment, and we could get past that moment.

是的。我也试着更加有意识地注意这一点。然后当我选择谈论它的时候，通常是因为我深思熟虑过，我会想——“你知道吗？这是值得的。”现在，我是这么说的，但我也经常发现自己在想相反的事情，我会追随某个人，仅仅是因为他们的某些技术工作，然后我——或者学习到的东西，或者政治立场。我经常会想，“我希望我不知道这些。”所以，对他人抱有这种想法然后又说，“嗯，我偶尔会——”就是虚伪的。 ……参与一场有争议的辩论，”然后你必须接受这有其代价。我确实认为你应该这么做，而且更多的人也应该在某种程度上意识到这一点。再说一次，我们在这里都有些自相矛盾，但会说，“如果我们能在更自由开放的场合讨论政治，仅仅通过智力交换观点，那该有多好？”是的，那会很好。在当前社交媒体等环境下，这可能实现吗？相当困难。现在，有些情况可能也只是一个瞬间，我们也可能会度过那个瞬间。

Yeah. I hope so.

是啊。我也希望如此。

Maybe there is a way to get back to Buckley’s conversation with the Black Panthers, even on social media, in a way where those discussions don’t lead to the sort of just vicious mob cancellation nonsense drives that we’ve had, right? I actually think we’re closer there now than we were five years ago. Like, the tribalism and the sanctions those tribes were able to exact on heretics in 2020 was way greater than it was in 2025. Certainly within tech. Now, I know if you’re in academia, I mean, try going into the sociology department at I don’t know, Harvard and mention some right-wing ideas. I don’t think it’s gonna go over very well, and I don’t think you’re gonna recover from it quickly. But in, in tech and in many other business domains at least, it is now possible to have an opinion that does not square with what the consensus was in 2020. That’s for sure.

也许有办法回到巴克利与黑豹党的对话，即使是在社交媒体上，也能以一种方式进行讨论，而这些讨论不会导致我们之前经历过的那种恶意网络群体取消行为，对吧？我实际上认为，现在我们比五年前更接近那种情况。比如说，2020 年，各个部落能够对异端行使的部落主义和制裁要远远大于 2025 年的情况。当然，在科技领域尤其如此。我知道，如果你在学术界，比如说去我不知道的哈佛大学的社会学系，提出一些右翼观点，我觉得效果不会很好，而且你也不太可能很快从中恢复过来。 但至少在科技和许多其他商业领域，现在有可能持有一种与 2020 年共识不一致的观点。这是肯定的。

Well, there’s some drama in the Rails community. There’s some drama elsewhere. Is it… How did that turn out? Is that all okay?

嗯，Rails 社区有些戏剧化。其他地方也有些戏剧化。那是……结果怎么样了？一切都还好吗？

In the sense that every single round of drama shrinks. So it’s like we’ve, we had this peak infection of mega drama around the same time every other community had a peak infection of drama around 2020. And then you just see, like, every time there’s a new flare up, it’s less. And the kind of people who are ideologically wedded to sort of that struggle just shrinks and shrinks and shrinks. And at this point, one of the best things that happened for X, in my opinion, was that Bluesky and Mastodon came around. Because it kind of was like this honeypot for just the most vicious individuals on X and Twitter at the time, right? Who just congregated here in an ever-shrinking echo chamber that just went through purity cycle after purity cycle and shrank every single time to the point that there were just not a lot left. And the people who are left now there, they’re just out of sight, out of mind. And that’s not to say that X is some sort of perfect place, or there aren’t firing squads occasionally there, or there aren’t… But there’s less of it. Like, every single time I’ve been pulled into a Mastodon, or not been pulled in, just spectated from afar, thread, a Bluesky or whatever, it was like, “Oh, shit yeah, this is what Twitter used to be like. Jesus.” And now you can actually be on X, as I am, and, like, 90% of my engagement is about cool Linux stuff, cool technology stuff. “Look, I discovered a new computer. Can you see how fast it is?” And I can have those conversations with other people who are just also excited about computers. And then there’s, like, 10% of it left that’s like, all right, I’ll chime in on something that’s a little controversial, and we can have a little discussion there. And then we can just go back to being excited about computers. The algorithm is actually very good at finding stuff that you will find interesting, or I shouldn’t say that, engaging. Sometimes it’s enraging, but it is engaging, and therefore, revealed preference is that most people want a For You page. They don’t want just a following feed.

从每一轮戏剧性事件都在缩小的意义上来说。所以就好像我们在大约 2020 年左右经历了这类大型戏剧事件的高峰，而其他每个社区也差不多有类似的高峰。然后你会发现，每次出现新的小高潮，影响都在减少。而那些在意识形态上依附于这种斗争的人群也在不断缩小。到这一点，我认为对 X 来说最好的事情之一是 Bluesky 和 Mastodon 的出现。因为它们有点像一个蜜罐，吸引了当时 X 和 Twitter 上最恶毒的个体，对吧？ 谁刚刚聚集在这里，在一个不断缩小的回声室中，这个回声室经历了一次又一次的纯洁循环，每一次都缩小到几乎没有留下多少人。现在还留在那里的那些人，他们已经不在视线内，也不在脑海里。这并不是说 X 是某种完美的地方，或者那里从来没有过处决队，或者没有……但这种情况减少了。比如，每次我被拉进 Mastodon，或者没有被拉进去，只是远远旁观，看到一个帖子、一个 Bluesky 或者其他什么的，我就会想，‘哦，天哪，是的，这就是 Twitter 以前的样子。天啊。’而现在你实际上可以像我一样使用 X，并且我大约 90%的互动都是关于很酷的 Linux 东西，很酷的技术东西。 “看，我发现了一台新电脑。你能看到它有多快吗？”我可以和其他同样对电脑感兴趣的人进行这样的对话。然后还有大约 10%的内容是这样的，‘好吧，我来参与一些有点争议的话题，我们可以在这里进行一点讨论。’然后我们又可以回到对电脑感到兴奋的状态。这个算法实际上非常擅长找到你会感兴趣的东西，或者我不应该这么说，是说会引起你关注的东西。有时它可能会让人愤怒，但它确实很吸引人，因此，从显性偏好来看，大多数人想要的是“For You”页面。他们不只是想要一个关注页。

No, but they’re addicted to the For You page, right?

不，但他们对‘为你推荐’页面上瘾，对吧？

They… Yes, yes. That’s true.

他们……是的，是的。那是真的。

I think an LLM, like, if we had a strong LLM doing the feed that’s personalized, it would do much better. The problem is how to deliver that at scale is extremely difficult.

我认为一个大型语言模型，比如说，如果我们有一个强大的大型语言模型来做个性化的推荐，它会做得更好。问题是如何大规模地提供这是非常困难的。

Well, the problem is the, the reward function is engagement. And as soon as the reward function is engagement— … engagement’s gonna follow base instincts, and here we go. But I also don’t wanna be so negative. To me, and I get we all have our own personalized algorithms, and sometimes it gets a little much. But I would say, on average, over the last 10 years, this is the best X has ever been. And I say that as someone who cares about a lot of technology talk, a lot of Linux talk, and a lot of that. That that’s able to happen now in a way where it doesn’t constantly get gatecrashed by people who wanna drag it into some political discussion… … I find to be really awesome. I find actually X to be a great place to find that. Now, it’s also a place to find other things, and we all have our own algorithms, so you can’t make any declarative announcements about what X is or what it isn’t. Your feed is probably totally different from my feed, and it’s totally different from someone else’s feed, right?

好吧，问题是，奖励函数是参与度。一旦奖励函数是参与度——……参与度就会跟随基本本能，然后事情就这样了。但我也不想太消极。对我来说，我知道我们每个人都有自己个性化的算法，有时候会有点过头。但我想说的是，平均来看，在过去的十年里，这是 X 有史以来最好的一次。我这么说是作为一个关心很多技术话题、很多 Linux 话题的人说的，这些东西现在能够以一种方式发生，不会被那些想把它拖入政治讨论的人不断破坏…… … 我觉得真的非常棒。我其实觉得 X 是一个找到那个东西的好地方。现在，它也是一个找到其他东西的地方，而且我们都有自己的算法，所以你不能对 X 是什么或者不是什么做任何确定性的声明。你的信息流可能完全不同于我的信息流，而且它也完全不同于别人的信息流，对吧？

Yeah, I can’t comment on this because of the nature of the fact that I interview a wide variety of people, my feed is probably just a—

是的，我无法对此发表评论，因为我采访各种各样的人，我的动态可能只是一个——

Is it, is it good for your feed or is it bad for your feed that you have to have it, right?

它，它对你的饲料好还是不好，你必须拥有它，对吧？

It’s bad.

这不好。

Okay.

好的。

It’s bad ’cause I could be like, “I’m eating this apple. It’s so delicious.”

这不好，因为我可能会说，“我在吃这个苹果。它真好吃。”

Oh.

哦。

And then a bunch of people will show up, “Well, it’s because you’re a Zelensky shill—

然后一大群人会出现，说，“嗯，那是因为你是泽连斯基的走狗——

Yeah, right.

是啊，没错。

… or you’re a Putin shill, you piece of shit.” It’s like, all right. I’ll just go back to the-

…或者你是普京的走狗，你这个混蛋。” 就像，好吧。我就回到—

I mean, I occasionally have a little bit of that where you just go like, “Wait, what? What are we talking about? What are you… Why would you show up in this way?” This is one of the reasons why I actually really enjoy podcasts, because I have found that even in long form writing, when I make long form arguments, people hear it in whatever voice they have in their head for me. And that often gets pre-programmed in advance of the arguments, just like, well, this guy is a, whatever, fascist. And then they hear the words and they read the words in those names. When they see or hear the actual tone of how I’m presenting the arguments, they may not agree with those arguments. I mean, many of them, of course, obviously don’t. But it’s much harder to just dismiss or hate someone like that. At least that’s what I’ve found, and that’s the response that I’ve gotten, that people are like, “Well, I had a certain opinion and then I heard you on Lex. That actually sounded much more reasonable.”

我的意思是，我偶尔也会有那种感觉，就是你会想，“等等，什么？我们在谈论什么？你…你为什么会以这种方式出现？”这也是我实际上非常喜欢播客的原因之一，因为我发现即使是在长篇写作中，当我提出长篇论点时，人们也会用他们脑海里对我的声音来听。我发现这种声音常常在论点之前就已经预先设定好了，就像说，这家伙是个什么什么的法西斯。然后他们听到这些话，看到这些词，就会用那些名字去理解。当他们看到或听到我实际呈现论点的语气时，他们可能不同意这些论点。我的意思是，他们中的许多人，当然，显然是不同意的。但以这种方式去否定或讨厌某个人就困难得多。 至少这是我的发现，这也是我得到的回应，人们会说，“嗯，我曾有过某种观点，但后来我在 Lex 上听到你的说法。那实际上听起来更合理。”

But even more than that, I would love it if people just exercise this kind of approach to other people of, like, assuming they’re a good person.

但更重要的是，如果人们对其他人也能采用这种方法，假设他们是好人，那我会非常高兴。

Yes.

是的。

And then, and if they have an opinion you disagree with, they’re a good person who has an opinion. You can maybe think they’re stupid, fine. Just think they’re lost. But think of them as a good person. I think if you think of, you start, there’s, one of the things that gets engagement is kind of shitting on other people.

然后，如果他们有一个你不同意的观点，他们仍然是一个有自己观点的好人。你可能会觉得他们愚蠢，也没关系。只要认为他们迷失了。但要把他们看作是好人。我认为，如果你开始思考，有一件事情会增加参与度，那就是有点贬低别人。

Right.

对。

And if you just approach other people as they’re, you’re looking for bad, you will always find bad in them. There’s something annoying about them.

如果你只是以别人是坏人为前提去接近他们，你总会在他们身上发现坏的一面。他们身上总有让人恼火的地方。

100%.

100%.

And if you look at people in that way, you’re not gonna learn from it, and you’re gonna fill your heart with hate. You’re not gonna, it’s just a bad way to live and to interact with the world, and that is one of the things that the internet kind of encourages, so. It’d be nice if you just approach even people who you really disagree with, it’s like, oh, I might learn something from this person. The Black Panther person, William Buckley, we might hate just love them.

如果你以那种眼光看待别人，你是学不到东西的，而且你的心里会充满仇恨。你不会学到东西，这只是一种糟糕的生活方式和与世界互动的方式，而这正是互联网在某种程度上所鼓励的。因此，如果你能以一种态度接触那些你非常不同意的人就好了，就像是，哦，我可能会从这个人身上学到点东西。黑豹的人，威廉·巴克利，我们可能讨厌，但也要爱他们。

So microcosm of this. There’s a guy, Theo, I don’t know if you follow him.

这是这个的缩影。有个家伙，Theo，我不知道你是否关注他。

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

是的，是的，是的。

We had a bit of a thing over the fact that we stopped using TypeScript-

我们因为停止使用 TypeScript 这件事有些小争执——

Yeah

是的

… for a project, and he didn’t like that and had opinions about that and other actions. And after that I thought like, what a bozo. And, and do you know what? I still think that was a bozo move, and then I can also think like, well, the dude’s really into AI. He’s trying all these models, and we can share some excitement about that, so I just started following him yesterday.

……为了一个项目，他不喜欢那样，并且对那件事和其他行为都有自己的看法。在那之后，我心想，这人真傻。你知道吗？我仍然觉得那真是个傻招，但我也能想，嗯，这家伙真的很热衷于人工智能。他正在尝试所有这些模型，我们可以因此分享一些兴奋感，所以我昨天就开始关注他了。

Awesome.

太棒了。

I was like, do you know what? I don’t have to agree with you on everything. I don’t even have to like some of the things that you did or said or whatever. I can follow you anyway. So if I can follow back Theo, then I think there’s room for world peace here.

我当时的想法是，你知道吗？我不必在所有事情上都同意你的观点。我甚至不必喜欢你做的或说的某些事情，无论是什么。但我仍然可以关注你。所以如果我可以关注回 Theo，那么我认为这里有和平的可能性。

Yeah, he’s actually a really good example. He, he’s really opinionated, changes his mind quite a bit, can get snarky, but I think he’s a good person underneath.

是的，他实际上是一个很好的例子。他，他很有主见，经常改变主意，有时会有些刻薄，但我认为他内心是个好人。

And either way, I just, you know what? My feed is more interesting when there’s some people talking about things that I care about and yeah, I don’t have to agree with you on everything. I just don’t.

不管怎样，我就是，你知道吗？当有人讨论我关心的事情时，我的动态会更有趣，是的，我不必在所有事情上都同意你的观点。我就是不同意。

This I found pretty funny, that you mentioned something your wife said that stuck with you, that all this tech-adjacent extreme longevity focus in men is like anorexia in women, a physical manifestation of anxiety and lack of control. That somehow rang true a little bit.

我觉得这很有趣，你提到你妻子说过的一句话让你印象深刻：男人对极端长寿的科技相关关注，就像女性的厌食症，是焦虑和缺乏控制感的身体表现。某种程度上，这句话有点道理。

It certainly did to a lot of people. I think that tweet really popped off, and I don’t know if you noticed, but Bryan Johnson chimed in on the thread, and I could see how Bryan would read that as a bit of a jab. And I do think that Jamie was probably thinking of him amongst other people in that conversation. And it’s also an example of where even though I’m not subscribing to Bryan’s mission of, I think it’s the slogan’s Don’t Die. I actually do wanna die. I don’t wanna do this forever. Like, I think the human lifespan of about 90 to 100 sounds about right. I’m embracing the finitude of life. We don’t have to agree on that. In fact, Bryan is a vastly more interesting human to me because we don’t agree with that, and Bryan’s willingness to literally put his own skin and all sorts of other body elements in the game for that mission is really interesting. Now, I can have that view—this is really interesting, I’m glad Bryan is pursuing this passion of his—and then also find my wife’s analysis to ring true, that it does seem like there is some underlying, I don’t know, fear of… I was talking to Jamie yesterday about this, and she was saying or comparing it to this sense of people who didn’t feel like they had lived enough. And one of the reasons perhaps that they hadn’t lived enough was that modern society now is a surveillance state, not by the state actually, but by each other. There are camera phones everywhere. Every indiscretion or even outburst of fun or cringe is highly likely to be recorded and then shared to the point of ridicule. And what is the rational reaction for humans under those conditions is to pull back, is to make sure you don’t dance like nobody’s watching because- … they’re probably filming you to your great and eternal embarrassment on the internet, so maybe you just shouldn’t dance at all. And therefore, if we’ve all retracted to the point that we’re barely living, we’re clinging on to wanting it to last forever. Now- … I mean, I’m sure that thesis does not apply in all circumstances. I don’t even know if it applies to Bryan or, or anyone else here. But I think there’s something to this: that if you feel like you’ve really lived, you’re okay thinking I’ve lived enough, and that it having an end is not something to be fought. Now, is it also possible that this is all just existential post-rationalization, and if tomorrow there was a live forever pill, we’d all take it? Yeah, that’s possible. Is it also possible that if we did that, society would be worse off? Yes. Is it possible that the human lifespan is the length it is for sociological reasons, not just biological reasons? Yes. So I think these are just all interesting questions, and I just thought her analysis really got to something here. And that discussion has come up afterwards. I mean, that, I think that tweet is like a year old. But just recently, we’ve been talking about this over-optimizers. I saw Chris Williamson, Modern Wisdom had a bit where he was like, “Yeah, okay, maybe we did go a little overboard.” And the triggering thing was the Diary of a CEO, where the host was saying something to the effect of, “I had a glass of wine and the next three days were ruined.”

对很多人来说确实是这样。我觉得那条推文真的很火，不知道你有没有注意到，Bryan Johnson 也在那个话题下发表评论，我能理解 Bryan 会把那看作有点挖苦。我确实觉得 Jamie 在那次谈话中可能在想他，当然也包括其他人。这也是一个例子，说明即便我并不认同 Bryan 的使命——我记得口号是“别死”。 我实际上真的想死。我不想永远这样下去。我觉得大约 90 到 100 岁的人类寿命听起来差不多。我在接受生命的有限性。我们不必对此达成一致。事实上，Bryan 对我来说是一个更有趣的人，因为我们对此意见不合，而 Bryan 为了那个使命愿意把自己的皮肤和各种其他身体元素 literally 放进游戏里，这真的很有趣。现在，我可以持有这种看法——这真的很有趣，我很高兴 Bryan 在追求他的激情——然后也能觉得我妻子的分析是正确的，好像确实存在某种潜在的，我不知道，恐惧…… 我昨天在和杰米谈这个，她说或者把它比作那些感觉自己没有好好生活过的人。而他们之所以可能没有好好生活过的原因之一，是因为现代社会现在是一个监控社会，其实不是由国家，而是由彼此监控。到处都是带摄像头的手机。每一次不慎行为，甚至是一次玩乐或尴尬的爆发，都很可能被录下来，然后被分享以至于被嘲笑。在这种情况下，人类的理性反应就是退缩，就是确保自己不会像没人看见一样去跳舞，因为—— ……他们可能正在拍摄你，在互联网上让你感到巨大而永恒的尴尬，所以也许你干脆根本不要跳舞。因此，如果我们都退缩到几乎没有生活的地步，我们就是在紧抓着希望它永远持续下去。现在—— … 我的意思是，我确定这个论点并不适用于所有情况。我甚至不知道它是否适用于布莱恩，或者这里的其他任何人。但我认为这里面有一些道理：如果你觉得自己真的活过，你会觉得我已经活得够了，而且生命有终点并不是一件需要抗争的事情。现在，也有可能这只是存在主义的事后理性化，如果明天有一种永生药，我们都会服用吗？是的，这有可能。如果我们真的那样做，社会会变得更糟吗？是的。这人类寿命的长度可能是出于社会学原因，而不仅仅是生物学原因，这有可能吗？是的。 所以我认为这些问题都很有趣，我只是觉得她的分析确实触及了一些关键点。之后也引发了相关讨论。我的意思是，那条推文大概是一年前发的。但就在最近，我们一直在讨论这些过度优化者。我看到 Chris Williamson 的《现代智慧》中有一段，他说，“好吧，也许我们确实有点过火了。”而触发这件事的，是《CEO 日记》，主持人当时说的意思是，“我喝了一杯酒，接下来的三天都毁了。”

Okay.

好的。

And that to me, I mean, in his circumstance, I’m sure that’s true. Like, if you have not drank any alcohol for a very long time and you have just a little, I could see how it can have an effect. But also there’s something in that that just triggered a visceral reaction, I think, for a lot of people, and myself included, where I was like, “Fuck, man, I should have a glass of wine just right now, even though I don’t usually drink.” And in fact I think the alcohol question is a good microcosm to zoom in on. So we’ve all stopped drinking apparently, like alcohol sales are way down- … certainly amongst young people. And then on the one hand, on the pure health metrics, whatever, we can go like, “Oh wow, isn’t that great?” And then I go like, “Yeah, I’m not so sure it is.” Like the social lubricant that alcohol can provide may be missed, is missed. I mean, we are in an absolute epidemic of loneliness and misery and depression and whatever, and a fair amount of it just probably comes because you’re not interacting enough with other people. Now, that’s before we even talk about coupling, right? Like way down, people having a very hard time meeting a spouse. And- … a lot of that has moved over to apps that have all sorts of negative outcomes and consequences, right? Like maybe we will look back, or maybe we already are looking back and thinking like, “Eh, do you know what? Maybe getting wasted every once in a while was not the worst thing in the world.” And whether wasted or not, maybe just having a couple of drinks every Friday or Saturday when you’re out and about was part of what helped society get to where it is. Maybe the fact that humans have literally been drinking for whatever it is, like 13,000 years fermenting things, had a social purpose, and we pull out Chesterton’s fence of our own chagrin, right?

对我来说，我是说，在他的情况下，我相信那是真的。比如，如果你很长时间没有喝过任何酒，刚喝一点，我能理解它会产生影响。但同时，这里面也有一些东西触发了很多人的本能反应，包括我自己，我当时就想，“妈的，兄弟，我现在就应该喝一杯酒，尽管我平时不怎么喝。” 事实上，我认为酒精问题是一个很好的微观案例，可以深入观察。显然，我们都已经不喝酒了，比如酒精销量大幅下降……尤其是在年轻人当中。另一方面，从纯粹的健康指标来看，随便说说，“哇，这不是很棒吗？” 然后我会说，“是啊，我不太确定是这样。” 就像酒精可以提供的社交润滑剂可能会被错过，的确是会被错过。我的意思是，我们正处在一种绝对的孤独、痛苦、抑郁等的流行病中，其中很大一部分可能只是因为你没有足够地与他人互动。现在，这还是在我们讨论伴侣关系之前的情况，对吧？就像很多人很难找到配偶。然后—— ……很多事情已经转移到了那些带来各种负面结果和后果的应用程序上，对吧？也许我们会回头看，或者也许我们已经在回头看并在想，‘嗯，你知道吗？也许偶尔喝得烂醉并不是世界上最糟糕的事。’不论是否喝醉，也许每个周五或周六外出时喝几杯只是帮助社会发展到现状的一部分。也许人类字面上已经喝酒无论多少年，比如说 13,000 年在发酵各种东西，是有社会目的的，而我们却出于自己的懊恼拆掉了切斯特顿的篱笆，对吧？

As you mentioned, in the spirit of that, so when I traveled across rural China, I did smoke a little bit in, in my early 20s, but I picked up just for that trip-

正如你提到的，本着那种精神，所以当我在中国农村旅行时，我确实在二十出头的时候抽过一点烟，但那只是为了那次旅行才开始的。

A social connector, right?

是一个社交连接者，对吧？

And I drank humongous amounts, even though I don’t really drink these days, because of the social thing. It’s the way they show love. And I also ate shitload of carbs, which- … I’m usually low carb. I just like meat. So just because it’s the way they show love. And actually even, it’s in that society cigarettes, but in most societies, liquor is a thing to do together. And it’s a bond. The benefits that that entails can, in many situations, outweigh the negative consequences like long-term for whatever, however you measure them.

即使我现在几乎不喝酒，我还是喝了大量的酒，因为这是社交的一部分。这是他们表达爱的方式。我也吃了大量的碳水化合物，而我平时通常都是低碳水饮食。我只是喜欢吃肉。所以仅仅因为这是他们表达爱的方式。实际上，在那个社会里还有香烟，但在大多数社会里，饮酒是一起进行的事情。这是一种纽带。在许多情况下，这种带来的好处可能超过诸如长期后的负面后果，无论你如何衡量。

And this is the myopia of modernity, that we reduce things down to like, well, one glass on this long run study meant that you had a 0.1% greater risk of some heart defect. Yes, but if you didn’t live at all, what’s the point? And again, it’s also easy to flip over the other side. Like the only way to live is to get drunk every weekend and eat a bunch of crap and smoke 40 cigarettes a day. No, it’s not. Like it doesn’t have to be the either/or. This is one of the reasons I stopped wearing my Oura Ring. So I wore the Oura sleep ring for many years, four years. And one day I was just like, “I don’t need to know that I had-” … “a bad night of sleep.” Like I know. This added, I don’t wanna call it an anxiety, I don’t have a lot of anxiety, but this added just like reminder- … that I had a bad night of sleep, what purpose is it actually playing here? Why do I need to have all these stats? Why do I need to optimize everything? To the point where, again, after that single anecdote, you know, from Diary of a CEO, I was like, “Fuck, I kind of want the opposite.” Like- I don’t barely drink at all. I, a glass of wine once a month maybe. Like, do you know what? I should start just on the weekends, get a glass. Maybe two. And also, I mean, I’ve never been the person to fret about my diet. This is one of the great privileges of being married to—and I’ll do a quick aside here. Don’t ever call a woman in her 40s a wonderful woman. My wife was so pissed… that not only last year did I come on her birthday, that was bad enough, but that I called her a wonderful woman on the show, because that sounded like her name was Nancy and she was 65— … in the suburb of Rochester. So I’m like, I was trying to play the 50. Like, no, I don’t know, I’m Danish. How, how would I know? But that didn’t go over well. So I’m gonna say awesome woman instead. If you marry an awesome woman who also not only knows how to cook, but enjoys it do you know what? There’s a very traditional division of labor here that has been quite stable through several … tens of thousands of years in human societies, that perhaps also wasn’t the worst idea in the world. And I also know there are plenty of men who like to cook, and there are women who don’t. But as stereotypes go, eh, that certainly helped me. Like, I don’t think I would’ve been able to just be as relaxed about food if I didn’t eat relatively healthy on a regular basis. But the overall point being just getting out of that optimization game without turning into the opposite. You don’t have to be a fat slob on the couch either. You can move around.

这就是现代性的近视，我们把事情简化到，比如说，在这项长期研究中，如果你每天喝一杯，你患某种心脏缺陷的风险会增加 0.1%。是的，但如果你根本活不了，这有什么意义？而且，同样，也很容易翻到另一面。比如说，唯一的生活方式就是每个周末喝醉、吃一堆垃圾食品、每天抽 40 支烟。不，这不是必然。也就是说生活不必非此即彼。这也是我停止戴 Oura 戒指的原因之一。我戴 Oura 睡眠戒指很多年，四年。有一天，我突然想，“我不需要知道我昨晚睡得如何……” …“睡得不好。”我自己知道。这种附加的，我不想称之为焦虑，我没有太多焦虑，但它就像一种额外的提醒— ……我昨晚睡得很糟，这究竟有什么意义呢？我为什么需要拥有所有这些数据？我为什么需要优化一切？以至于，再次，因为那一个小故事，你知道的，《CEO 日记》里的那个故事，我当时就想，“操，我有点想做相反的事情。”比如——我几乎不喝酒。我，也许一个月喝一杯红酒。比如，你知道吗？我应该从周末开始，喝一杯，也许两杯。 还有，我是说，我从来不是那种会为自己的饮食操心的人。这是结婚后的一个巨大特权——我顺便说一下。永远不要称四十多岁的女人为“妙女人”。我妻子非常生气……不仅因为去年我在她生日那天发作，这已经够糟了，还因为我在节目里叫她“妙女人”，因为那听起来像她叫南希，65 岁……住在罗切斯特的郊区。所以我当时想试着说 50 岁。就像，不，我不知道，我是丹麦人。我怎么会知道呢？但那效果不太好。所以我打算改成叫她“超棒的女人”。 如果你娶了一个很棒的女人，她不仅会做饭，而且还喜欢做饭，你知道吗？在这里有一种非常传统的劳动分工，这种分工在人类社会中已经相当稳定地存在了几万年，也许这也不是世界上最糟的主意。我也知道有很多男人喜欢做饭，也有些女人不喜欢做饭。但就刻板印象而言，嗯，这确实帮了我大忙。比如，如果我平时不相对健康地饮食，我想我也无法对食物保持这么轻松的态度。但总体而言，关键是摆脱那种优化游戏，而不是变成另一个极端。你也不必成为沙发上的肥胖懒人。你可以四处活动。

Yeah. And then the bigger point we’re talking about is the finiteness of life.

是的。然后我们讨论的更重要的观点是生命的有限性。

Yes.

是的。

And I agree with you on this.

我在这一点上同意你的看法。

This was actually a feature, I built it into Omarchy. So memento mori. Remember death. If you pull down the calendar in Amaci, you open it by clicking the clock. It opens up, and the first funny thing, I took it off the internet. There’s this account called Years Progress, and it, every day it updates, and it just shows 63% done with 2026. I don’t know if you’ve seen that one. So it just fills up. So I built that into the calendar. So right now it says, “We’re 63% done with 2026.” But then if you double-click that, it’ll ask you, “When were you born? How long do you expect to live?” And the default is 90. So I put in 1979. And then right below the line of, like, how long are we done with the year-

这实际上是一个功能，我把它内置在 Omarchy 里。所以 memento mori。记住死亡。如果你在 Amaci 里打开日历，你可以点击时钟来打开它。它会打开，第一个有趣的事情，我是从互联网上拿的。有一个账户叫做 Years Progress，它每天都会更新，并且显示 2026 年已经完成了 63%。我不知道你是否见过那个。所以它只是一直在填满。所以我把它内置到日历里。所以现在它会显示，“我们已经完成了 2026 年的 63%。”但是如果你双击它，它会问你，“你什么时候出生？你预计会活多久？”默认值是 90。所以我输入了 1979。然后就在一条线的正下方，比如说，今年我们完成了多久—

Oh, that’s beautiful.

哦，那真美。

… is a new line that shows how long are you done with your life. I think I’m at 62%. I’m like, if you hover over it, it says, “Memento mori.”

… 是一个新行，用来显示你的人生已经完成了多长时间。我觉得我大概完成了 62%。我就像，如果你把鼠标悬停在上面，它会显示，“Memento mori（记住你必死）。”

That’s beautiful.

那真漂亮。

Fair number of people found it morbid, but this was why it is an Easter egg. It’s not, like, exposed. You gotta click a few things to get there. I like the reminder. I like the reminder that time is finite, and I should make the most of it. And this is also one of the privileges of having children. You really realize that the cliches are all true. Oh my God, it goes so fast. And I remember my now 13-year-old being one, being two. I was like, “This was just yesterday.” And the reason it’s a cliche is because it’s a shared experience. Cliches are good. They remind you that you are part of the human experience, and others have been here before you.

相当多的人觉得这很阴沉，但这就是它成为彩蛋的原因。它不是那种显而易见的东西，你得点击几下才能到达那里。我喜欢这个提醒。我喜欢这个提醒——时间是有限的，我应该充分利用它。这也是有孩子的特权之一。你会真正意识到那些老生常谈都是对的。天哪，时间过得真快。我记得我现在 13 岁的孩子还一岁，两岁时的样子。我当时想：“这不就像是昨天发生的吗。”而之所以它是老生常谈，是因为这是一个共享的经历。老生常谈也很好，它提醒你，你是人类经验的一部分，别人也曾走过同样的路。

I have to ask, you mentioned the amazing woman and great cook.

我得问一下，你提到了那位了不起的女性和出色的厨师。

Amazing.

惊人。

Amazing.

惊人。

Very important to remember. Not wonderful, amazing.

非常重要要记住。不是很棒，不是惊人的。

Amazing. So there’s this… You talked some shit about croissants or something. I saw this in a tweet. So is the Danish croissant somehow better?

太棒了。所以有这个……你说了些关于羊角面包的废话什么的。我在推特上看到了这个。那么丹麦羊角面包 somehow 更好吗？

Actually, Danish croissants are not particularly good. In my opinion, the only place you can find a half-decent croissant, of all places, is 7-Eleven, which is hilarious to me because 7-Eleven in the US is the place where, at least in Chicago, you’d go to get a slushie and try to avoid getting murdered. But in Denmark, 7-Eleven is this very upscale, super nice convenience store, and they just happen to make decent croissants. And it always baffled me that I lived in the United States for 20 freaking years. I have yet to have a single croissant that’s even at the level of a 7-Eleven croissant in Copenhagen. That seems improbable.

实际上，丹麦羊角面包并不是特别好。依我看，唯一能找到一个还算不错的羊角面包的地方，竟然是 7-11，这让我觉得很搞笑，因为在美国，至少在芝加哥，去 7-11 通常是为了买冰沙，同时尽量避免被杀。但在丹麦，7-11 是一个非常高档、非常好的便利店，他们恰好能做出不错的羊角面包。一直让我困惑的是，我在美国生活了整整 20 年，却还没有吃过一个羊角面包的水平能达到哥本哈根 7-11 羊角面包的。那似乎不太可能。

Have you understood why?

你明白为什么吗？

No, I’ve legitimately considered hiring an investigative journalist to get to the bottom of this, because the number of theories I’ve heard have been all over the place. It’s the water. It’s the butter. It’s the skill. It’s the this, it’s the that, it’s the other thing. I’m like, none of it adds up to me. If it’s the butter, can’t you just import it? I thought I saw Danish butter in some supermarkets over here at the Lurpak. So that can’t be it. Can it be the skill? No, it can’t be the skill. There are plenty of French people and Belgian people, the best croissant makers in the world, who live in the US. Like, what is the reason? And then I get the second thing, which is- … “No, no, you just haven’t gone to the right place.” I’ve literally gone to 15 of quote unquote- … “the right place,” and all the croissants were shit. So before I leave the planet, I have to get to the bottom of why the United States cannot make a proper croissant. And I don’t, I’m not even asking about peak French croissants, peak Belgian croissants- … which are the best croissants in the world. I’m just asking about the 7-Eleven croissant from Copenhagen. Is that too much to ask for?

不，我真的考虑过雇一个调查记者来弄明白这件事，因为我听到的各种理论完全各不相同。是水的问题。是黄油的问题。是技巧的问题。是这个，是那个，是另一个。我心里想，这些都说不通。如果是黄油的问题，难道不能直接进口吗？我记得我在这里的一些超市里看到过丹麦黄油，像 Lurpak 那种。所以不可能是那个原因。难道是技巧吗？不，不可能是技巧。美国有很多法国人和比利时人，他们是世界上最好的可颂面包师。这到底是什么原因呢？然后我会遇到第二种说法，就是——“不，不，你只是没去对地方。”实际上我已经去了 15 个所谓的地方—— …“正确的地方”，但所有的羊角面包都很糟。所以在我离开这个星球之前，我必须弄清楚为什么美国做不出正宗的羊角面包。我不是在问法国顶级羊角面包，或比利时顶级羊角面包——它们是世界上最好的羊角面包。我只是问关于哥本哈根 7-11 的羊角面包。这要求太高了吗？

That’s a fascinating mystery. What, zooming out, what’s your favorite… This makes me wanna know, what’s your favorite meal? Like, if you, if I gave you a last meal and were to murder you after.

那是一个迷人的谜团。放远来看，你最喜欢的是什么……这让我想知道，你最喜欢的饭菜是什么？比如说，如果我给你安排最后一顿饭，然后要杀了你。

It all depends whether it’s lunch or it’s dinner. If it’s lunch-

这取决于是午餐还是晚餐。如果是午餐——

It’s one meal. What’s… I feel like if you’re getting murdered, it doesn’t really matter if it’s lunch or dinner.

这只是一顿饭。什么……我觉得如果你要被谋杀了，是午餐还是晚餐其实无所谓。

Well, it depends on what time of day you’re getting murdered.

嗯，这取决于你被谋杀的时间。

Oh, I see.

哦，我明白了。

If it’s an afternoon execution, I only get lunch.

如果是下午的处决，我只吃午饭。

Okay.

好的。

And if I get lunch, it’s at Louisiana, the museum north of Copenhagen. I was just there with Jamie two days ago, and we go there all the time. The museum is lovely. We don’t go for the museum. We go for the cafeteria. That in itself sounds crazy. Like-

如果我要吃午饭，那就是去路易斯安那美术馆，位于哥本哈根北部。我两天前刚和 Jamie 去过那里，我们经常去那里。那个美术馆很可爱。我们去那里不是为了看美术馆。我们是去食堂的。光这一点听起来就很疯狂。就像——

Yeah, it does.

是的，它确实如此。

… you’re gonna, you’re gonna drive half an hour to go to a cafeteria. Well, it just so happens to be, it is the best lunch I’ve probably ever had in my life. The chef there is just unbelievably good, and not only is the food amazing, what’s even more amazing to my systems-thinking brain is that at any one time when we were up there, I think there were probably 200 people waiting for their food.

……你要，嗯，你得开半个小时的车去一个自助餐厅。碰巧的是，那可能是我这辈子吃过的最好的一顿午餐。那里的厨师简直棒极了，而且不仅食物很棒，更令我这个系统思维的人惊讶的是，每次我们去那里时，我想大概有 200 人在排队等他们的食物。

Oh, shit.

哦，糟糕。

And our food was delivered in five minutes. They have a small menu, and clearly they make it in bulk, and it’s unbelievably delicious.

我们的食物五分钟就送到了。他们的菜单很小，而且显然是批量制作的，味道令人难以置信的美味。

Just a cafeteria at a museum?

只是博物馆里的一个自助餐厅吗？

It’s a cafeteria at a museum that happens to have the best lunch I’ve ever had anywhere in my life.

这是博物馆里的一个自助餐厅，碰巧提供了我一生中吃过的最棒的午餐。

What ki- what kind of food are we talking about? What’s, what kind of lunch food?

我们在说什么——什么类型的食物？什么，什么类型的午餐食品？

It’s, like, Nordic cuisine, so it’s, it’s… A funny thing is the menu, when I looked at it, I was like, “Do you know what? If I saw this menu…” As a kid, I’d go like, “I’m not eating here.”

这是那种北欧菜，所以，它就是……有趣的是菜单，当我看的时候，我就想，“你知道吗？如果我看到这个菜单……” 小时候，我会说，“我才不在这里吃呢。”

Okay.

好的。

It’s like, I don’t know-

就像，我不知道——

This is pretty fancy.

这相当华丽。

… root free fruit and- … and onions- … and all sorts of healthy stuff. That sounds disgusting. And then you sit down and eat it, and the angels sing. But it’s even more particular than that. It’s the butter. The whipped butter that they have there, the best butter anywhere in the world.

…… 无根的水果和- …… 和洋葱- …… 以及各种健康的东西。听起来很恶心。然后你坐下来吃它，天使们在唱歌。但甚至比这更特别。是黄油。他们那里的搅打黄油，世界上最好的黄油。

I think that has to be connected to the croissant mystery too.

我认为那也必须与羊角面包之谜有关。

There, there must be some connection. But literally- … even in Paris, I’ve never had whipped butter that tastes as delicious as the butter does at Louisiana in Copenhagen. Literally, I would drive 30 minutes- … to have bread and butter at the cafeteria in Louisiana.

那里，那里一定有某种联系。但字面上来说……即使在巴黎，我也从未吃过像哥本哈根路易西亚那里的黄油这么美味的鲜打黄油。真的，我会开车 30 分钟……去路易西亚自助餐厅吃面包和黄油。

Well, how’d you discover that? Just one day you went to the museum and-

嗯，你是怎么发现的？就有一天你去了博物馆，然后——

I think we just went to the museum-

我想我们只是去了博物馆——

And you tried a whole dish?

你竟然尝了一整道菜？

… and we had the lunch, and we were like…

……然后我们吃了午饭，然后我们就像……

This is weird.

这很奇怪。

This is rivaling the best tasting restaurants- … I’ve ever been to in my life, and I’ve gone to Noma a couple of times and tried what there is to try, and this is right up there.

这可以媲美我这辈子去过的最美味的餐厅……我去过几次 Noma，也尝过那里的菜，这家餐厅完全可以与之齐肩。

All right. What about dinner, since you mentioned? Is it something different that you have to think-

好吧。既然你提到了晚餐，那晚餐呢？是不是有什么不同的东西，你得考虑一下——

Well, I think there’s a lot of good options in Copenhagen, but actually I’ll pick a place in Spain. So there is this place in Marbella called Puente Romano. It’s a hotel, and down by the beach, they have this beach restaurant with fresh seafood. Unbelievably delicious. I’m trying to remember what it’s called, but yeah, if you look it up, the beach seafood place at Puente Romano is incredible.

嗯，我认为哥本哈根有很多不错的选择，但实际上我会选择西班牙的一个地方。马贝拉有一个叫做普恩特罗马诺的地方。那是一家酒店，在海滩旁边，他们有一家供应新鲜海鲜的海滩餐厅。美味得令人难以置信。我正在努力记住它的名字，但如果你查一下，普恩特罗马诺的海滩海鲜餐厅真的很棒。

How much of great food is, like, the place and the person you’re with, right? Or the experience when you first are there?

美食有多少是取决于你所在的地方和你在一起的人，对吧？或者是你第一次去那里的体验？

I mean, the ambiance certainly helps, but I think my taste buds are also just-

我的意思是，氛围当然有帮助，但我觉得我的味觉也只是——

Okay, that-

好吧，那-

… in tune for-

… 调好音为-

So it’s legit,

所以它是合法的，

… flavors

…口味

… it is just good food.

……它只是好吃的食物。

It’s just really good food. Because for ex- that cafeteria, there’s a lot of people. Like I wouldn’t rate it as like, oh my God, this is just a place I want to sit for two hours. But the food is so delicious.

这只是非常美味的食物。因为举个例子——那家自助餐厅，有很多人。就像我不会评价说，哦天哪，这是一个我想坐两个小时的地方。但食物真的很美味。

That’s one of the things I’m, in traveling across the country, I’m realizing to sample without bias, just try things. ‘Cause you I guess you might just be surprised. Maybe I’ll find your croissant. All right, we’ve talked about mortality. We talked about food.

这是我在全国旅行时意识到的一件事之一，就是要不带偏见地尝试，只是尝试东西。因为我想你可能会感到惊讶。也许我会找到你的羊角面包。好了，我们已经谈过了死亡率。我们也谈过了食物。

Settled end of life.

解决了生命终结问题。

A thousand years from now, what do you think is the future of humans, human civilization? You think we’re gonna make it?

一千年后，你认为人类、人类文明的未来会是什么样子？你认为我们能挺过去吗？

A thousand years from now?

一千年以后？

Yeah.

是的。

Man, I’m having trouble predicting 12 months from now.

天啊，我很难预测一年后的情况。

I know.

我知道。

A thousand?

一千？

You think we got a shot?

你认为我们有机会吗？

Oh, I’m gonna bet on optimism. I’m gonna bet on a multi-planetary species. I’m gonna bet that Elon gets that rocket to Mars, and we figure out how to bend space-time and discover some wormholes or, or something.

哦，我会押注乐观。我会押注人类成为多行星物种。我会押注埃隆会把火箭送到火星，我们会弄明白如何弯曲时空，并发现一些虫洞或者其他什么东西。

Once we do, do you think, you think all humans on Earth will die once or twice and be repopulated after we get a good backup going?

一旦我们做到，你认为，在我们建立好一个可靠的备份之后，地球上的所有人会死一次还是两次，然后重新繁衍吗？

I mean, that was actually one of my favorite episodes of Black Mirror, the one where they get uploaded to the 1980s sea town somewhere. And I just thought like, wow, this is both such a dark moment, yet also so beautiful in the shared recognition that, like, the ’80s were actually kind of amazing. Like, I don’t have a lot of nostalgia for many moments, but I do have nostalgia for the ’80s.

我的意思是，那实际上是我最喜欢的《黑镜》的一集之一，就是他们被上传到 1980 年代的某个海边小镇的那一集。我只是觉得，哇，这既是一个如此黑暗的时刻，同时又在共同认知中如此美好——就像，80 年代实际上有点棒。我对很多时刻并没有太多怀旧之情，但我确实对 80 年代有怀旧之情。

But-

但是——

And they say something about, like, whatever place and time you were in, the music you were listening to when you were 12 or- … or 14, 15, something like that, that’s what’s gonna stick with you. Like, no, I was only, I got to be 10 in the ’80s. So this was my early childhood, and I still have an unbelievably fond affiliation with the ’80s. So if I’m gonna be uploaded to the sky-

他们还会说什么，比如，不管你身处什么地方和时间，你在 12 岁或者……14、15 岁左右听的音乐，会一直伴随你。就像，不，我只是，我在 80 年代才 10 岁。所以这是我的早期童年，我仍然对 80 年代有着难以置信的深厚感情。所以如果我将要被上传到天空——

You want it to be the ’80s.

你希望那是八十年代。

… I’m doing the ’80s.

…我在做 80 年代的风格。

Wow. I don’t think I’ve actually ever heard anyone say that. Usually it’s ’70s or ’90s.

哇。我其实不认为我曾经听过有人这么说。通常都是说‘70 年代’或‘90 年代’。

Oh, and the-

哦，还有那个——

Because the ’80s is a-

因为八十年代是一个-

I really don’t like the ’90s. Can we talk about this?

我真的不喜欢 90 年代。我们能谈谈这个吗？

No, I’m done. Not done.

不，我完成了。没完成。

To me, this was the great turning point of nihilism. That both the music, the genre, the fashion- … everything turned from, like, this glamour, the pop, the optimism, even the yuppies and everything- … to grunge and Nirvana. And even though, I mean, I like the music, I don’t like the ethics. I don’t like- … the morals. I don’t like any of the underpinnings to it. There was just such a defeatism to it- … that in retrospect, I look back upon it, if I’m gonna get reinserted into the matrix, it’s gonna be the ’80s.

对我来说，这是虚无主义的重大转折点。音乐、流派、时尚——一切都从那种魅力、流行、乐观，甚至是雅皮士和其他所有东西——转向了垃圾摇滚和涅槃。即便如此，我是说，我喜欢音乐，但我不喜欢它的伦理。我不喜欢——道德。我不喜欢它的任何基础。那里充满了一种失败主义——回头看，如果我要被重新插入到矩阵中，那一定是 80 年代。

That was full of optimism and fun- … and colors.

那充满了乐观和乐趣……还有色彩。

Yes. I remember having these orange pants- … with, like, white dots on them. That was just a normal thing kids could wear in the ’80s. I’ve never fucking seen that today. Or I mean, even in the ’90s, it all turned just, like, Seattle gray. Great regression.

是的。我记得我有过一条这样的橙色裤子……上面有像白色小点的图案。在 80 年代，这只是孩子们可以穿的普通东西。我今天他妈的从没见过。或者我的意思是，即便是在 90 年代，一切都变成了西雅图灰色。真是巨大的倒退。

So the Nietzschean, you know, this idea of eternal recurrence. If you do a Groundhog Day and you live forever, you want it to be in the orange pants with the white dots in the ’80s.

所以尼采主义者，你知道，这个永恒回归的概念。如果你像《土拨鼠日》一样重复生活，并且永远活下去，你希望那是在 80 年代穿着白点橘色裤子的日子里。

Maybe I’m gonna skip the orange pants, but- … I’m definitely picking the ’80s.

也许我会跳过橙色裤子，但是……我肯定会选 80 年代的风格。

You said it. All right, DHH. Thank you so much for everything you do. Thank you for being an inspiration to all of us, for building cool shit in the world, and thank you for talking today.

你说得对。好吧，DHH。非常感谢你所做的一切。感谢你成为我们所有人的榜样，感谢你在世界上创造了很棒的东西，也感谢你今天的发言。

Anytime. Thank you, Lex, again for having me.

随时。再次感谢你，请我来，莱克斯。

Yeah. Thanks for listening to this conversation with DHH. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description, where you can also find links to contact me, ask questions, give feedback, and so on. And now, let me leave you with some words from Ralph Waldo Emerson. “Once you make a decision, the universe conspires to make it happen.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.

是的。感谢你收听与 DHH 的这次对话。为了支持这个播客，请查看描述中的赞助商链接，你还可以在其中找到联系我的方式、提问、提供反馈等链接。现在，让我留给你拉尔夫·瓦尔多·爱默生的一些话。“一旦你做出了决定，宇宙就会联合起来促使它发生。”感谢收听，希望下次再见。