七人都还没有被刑事起诉，名字和照片已贴满互联网：Reason 圆桌谈康奈尔案、没做成的注射死刑与奥特曼的「接受代价」

速览

• 2024 年 10 月 19 日，康奈尔大学大二学生（诉讼中化名 Jane Doe）深夜进入 Chi Phi 兄弟会住所，在饮酒与氯胺酮作用下与多名兄弟会成员发生性关系。她当年 11 月给校警的宣誓陈述把这段经历描述为自愿、清醒、双方同意，汤普金斯县地方检察官 Matthew Van Houten 据此决定不起诉。1
• 2026 年 9 月，她提起民事诉讼，指控同一晚的性行为未经同意、氯胺酮是被迫服用。Van Houten 说他在 9 月 18 日得知这份在新纽约县法院提交的民事起诉书，随后重新开卷。2
• 纽约州长 Kathy Hochul 于 10 月 1 日签署行政令，把该案交给州总检察长办公室以特别检察官身份侦办；总检察长 Letitia James 早在 9 月 28 日就已在 X 上称 Doe 为「survivor」并说「我们与你同在」。34
• 法院把传票送错了人。《Free Press》查出，被送达的是与其中一名被告同名的一名现役海军陆战队中士，他的家人因此持续遭到骚扰。5
• Hochul 所说的「自愿醉酒漏洞」在纽约州法里找不到。纽约州刑法 130.05 规定，醉酒本身并不自动使一个人失去同意的能力，除非药物或酒精是被强迫摄入，或者当事人已经失去意识。圆桌补了一句：七名被告里有一位主张自己当时醉到无法同意，这条逻辑若成立，会同时套到原告头上。6
• 田纳西 9 月 30 日晚两次注射戊巴比妥都没能结束 Christa Pike 的生命。律师称狱方为她插管用了至少七根针；她随后被送医、插管、接上呼吸机。州长 Bill Lee 已暂停该州今年余下的死刑执行，惩教署长 Frank Strada 辞职。7
• 死刑执行方式的失手率有据可查。1890 至 2010 年美国共执行 8,776 次，整体失手率 3.15%；注射为 7.2%，毒气 5.4%，绞刑 3.12%，电椅 1.92%；枪决在这 120 年里只用了 34 次，失手率为零。8
• Altman 说社会要为开源与广泛可及接受代价。他在《名利场》访谈里表示，会在开源模型上「接受一些相当严重的网络事件」，并用「飞机很安全，但有时还是会坠毁」作类比。同期，联邦贸易委员会正准备向 Anthropic、OpenAI 等前沿实验室发出类似传票的正式调查要求。910

一、同一晚的两份陈述

二、州长、总检察长，与那条并不存在的「漏洞」

三、被认错的那个人，和一场按平台分层的围猎

四、田纳西没做成的那次死刑

五、Altman 说，为了收益可以接受一些代价

我支持开源模型。会有一波网络安全问题从这些开源模型里涌出来。我们试着通过告诉大家我们有一点领先优势、愿意帮你们防守来让世界做好准备，但业内有人说我们应该禁掉开源，否则一大堆系统会被攻破。我不认为这个自由的价格值得付。作为一个社会，我想我们只能接受开源模型带来的、一些相当严重的网络事件，来换取随之而来的自由。9

六、这四个人本周在看什么

人物、机构与术语

• Robby Soave：Reason 资深编辑，本期主持。他同时是 Reason 旗下媒体评论栏目 Free Media 的作者，这期讨论的康奈尔案、总检察长任命、AI 监管三篇背景评论中，前两篇出自他手。29
• Liz Wolfe：Reason 副编辑。30
• Reem Ibrahim：Reason 记者。31
• Zach Weissmueller：Reason 资深制作人，长期报道社交媒体、审查与新兴技术。32

• Jane Doe：本案原告在诉讼中使用的化名。她在事发时是康奈尔大学大二学生，2024 年 11 月向校警作过宣誓陈述，2026 年 9 月提起民事诉讼。1
• Chi Phi 兄弟会：康奈尔大学的兄弟会组织，被指的事发地点。案件在校园媒体上被称为「康奈尔七人案」（Cornell 7）。11
• Matthew Van Houten：纽约州汤普金斯县地方检察官，2024 年审查该校警陈述后决定不予起诉，2026 年 9 月重新开卷，随后被州长签署的行政令移出该案。116
• Kathy Hochul：纽约州州长，民主党人。10 月 1 日签署行政令把案件交给州总检察长办公室，并在记者会上主张堵上她所说的「自愿醉酒漏洞」。3
• Letitia James：纽约州总检察长，10 月 1 日起以特别检察官身份领导该案调查；她在 9 月 28 日已公开称原告为「幸存者」。17
• 特别检察官（special prosecutor）：由州长以行政令指派的、取代或介入原有地方检察机构办案的检察官，在本案里意味着案件由县一级移交到州总检察长办公室。16
• 自愿醉酒与同意：纽约州刑法 130.05 规定，一个人醉酒并不会自动使其无法同意性行为；只有在药物或酒精被强迫摄入，或当事人因药物酒精失去意识时，同意才被认为不存在。这也是「漏洞」一说引发争议的地方。6
• 民事诉讼与刑事起诉：Jane Doe 提起的是民事诉讼，被告是七名兄弟会成员和康奈尔大学，诉求为补偿性与惩罚性赔偿；民事案件的举证门槛低于刑事定罪，而起诉书本身只是原告的单方主张。1
• Title IX：美国联邦民权法，禁止接受联邦资助的教育机构存在性别歧视。本案中 Jane Doe 曾提出投诉，触发校方 Title IX 委员会至少十几次听证。12
• 氯胺酮（ketamine）：一种有解离作用的麻醉剂，近年在美国校园娱乐性使用显著上升，节目里 Liz Wolfe 说它「成了新的可卡因」。本案中双方对它是自愿服用还是被劝说服用存在分歧。13

• Christa Pike：田纳西州死囚。1995 年 1 月与同伴杀害同学 Colleen Slemmer，1996 年、20 岁时被判死刑。20
• Colleen Slemmer：1995 年康奈尔案之外的另一起案件中的遇害者，Pike 一案的受害人。21
• 戊巴比妥（pentobarbital）：一种巴比妥类麻醉药物，美国多个州用它作为注射死刑的单一药物。本案中两次注射都未能致死，麻醉医生 Joel Zivot 认为药物很可能没有进入血液循环，而是渗入皮下组织。7
• 血小板增多症（thrombocytosis）：一种血液中血小板过多的疾病，Pike 的律师在 2026 年 1 月的诉讼中主张这一疾病使她更容易在注射部位形成血栓、增加建立静脉通路的难度。7
• 死刑信息中心（DPIC）：美国一个追踪死刑执行与争议的机构，它统计的「失手执行」数据被本案双方广泛引用。8

• Sam Altman：OpenAI 联合创始人兼首席执行官，2026 年 9 月底发布了 Dots 等新产品，随后在《名利场》的访谈里表达了「接受一些代价」的立场。9
• 《超级智能白宫协定》：特朗普 9 月底签署的自愿性文件，由美国头部 AI 公司领导人共同签署，列出四层控制与审计要求，由企业自证合规，不具有强制力。1033
• 联邦贸易委员会（FTC）与 CID：FTC 依据《联邦贸易委员会法》调查不公平或欺骗性商业行为，可发出民事调查要求（civil investigative demand，CID）——一种类似传票的强制取证文件；若企业无视其命令，FTC 可请求联邦法院处以民事罚款。10
• 监管俘获（regulatory capture）：指被监管行业的既有企业反过来影响监管规则，使之有利于自己、抬高后来者的门槛。本期里 Reem Ibrahim 用它解释为什么大公司 CEO 会主动呼吁监管。13
• 对齐（alignment）：让 AI 系统的目标与行为符合人类意图的研究方向。Liz Wolfe 在节目里提醒，这个词在不同公司、不同模型上指的不是同一件事。13
• PDoom：AI 安全圈里常用的缩写，指「AI 导致存在性灾难的概率」，节目里被拿来指称那一类末日论估算。13

完整逐字稿

00:00 - 10:00

Hello and welcome everybody to the Reason Roundtable. I am Robby Soave, joined today by Liz Wolfe, Reem Ibrahim, and Zach Weissmueller. We are not the typical Roundtable crew, as you probably know. Those folks are celebrating their 10-year anniversary putting this little podcast together, and it's been a great 10 years. I know I love listening, as do all of us. They'll be celebrating. With a special live taping, I believe in New York City, that will be released Wednesday. So you get a bonus episode of the Always Great Roundtable. But as for now, we're not the kids table. I've been told that is ridiculous because none of us are young. It was you, Zach, I could tell, particularly objecting to that. Okay, we're Degrassi, the next generation, I guess. Something along those lines. That's some millennial referencing. Okay. First topic today is a very serious one, and I know we're going to discuss it for a good long while because we all have strong views, I know. Reem and I have been discussing it in the office. That is, of course, the Cornell University sexual assault accusation lawsuit. They're being called the Cornell Seven. The fraternity brothers there who were accused of sexual abuse by a woman referred to as Jane Doe in her lawsuit, which she just filed. The events took place two years ago, October 19th, 2024. The discrepancy, of course, is between her initial text messages about what happened, this incident. series of sexual encounters and drug uses at a fraternity party, and then what she told the police and what she's saying now in her lawsuit. But this story has gone absolutely viral. And now the latest news is that Kathy Hochul, the governor of your state, Liz, has appointed Letitia James, the attorney general, to spearhead a new investigation. I watched their press conference on Friday. And I came away from it wary of the notion that it's even possible the seven accused fraternity brothers, not all of whom, by the way, are even accused of engaging in sexual conduct with Jane Doe, are going to get a fair shake given that Letitia James has already said publicly, has issued a statement in more than solidarity with the victim, but really wholesale accepting what the victim has to say. Um, is this, uh, are we, are we headed, you know, toward another kind of due process, uh, disaster, which has been the case in some of these previous, uh, past instances, Rolling Stone, um, uh, Ducal Cross, et cetera. Liz, I'll turn it over to you first.

中文：大家好，欢迎大家来到 Reason 圆桌会议。 我是 Robby Soave，今天加入的还有 Liz Wolfe、Reem Ibrahim 和 Zach Weissmueller。 您可能知道，我们不是典型的圆桌会议成员。 这些人正在庆祝他们制作这个小播客的 10 周年纪念日，这是一个伟大的 10 年。 我知道我喜欢倾听，就像我们所有人一样。 他们会庆祝的。 我相信纽约市将有特别的现场录音，将于周三发布。 因此，您将获得“永远伟大的圆桌会议”的奖励剧集。 但就目前而言，我们不是儿童餐桌。 有人告诉我这很荒谬，因为我们都不年轻了。 我看得出来，是你，扎克，特别反对这一点。 好吧，我想我们是 Degrassi，下一代。 沿着这些思路。 这是一些千禧年的参考。 好的。 今天的第一个话题是一个非常严肃的话题，我知道我们会讨论很长时间，因为我知道我们都有强烈的观点。 雷姆和我一直在办公室讨论这个问题。 那当然是康奈尔大学性侵犯指控诉讼。 他们被称为康奈尔七人组。 那里的兄弟会兄弟在她刚刚提起的诉讼中被一名名叫无名氏的妇女指控性虐待。 这些事件发生在两年前，即 2024 年 10 月 19 日。当然，差异在于她最初关于所发生事件的短信之间的差异。 在兄弟会聚会上发生的一系列性行为和吸毒，然后是她告诉警方的内容以及她现在在诉讼中所说的话。 但这个故事已经疯传。 现在最新消息是，利兹州州长凯西·霍楚尔 (Kathy Hochul) 已任命司法部长利蒂西亚·詹姆斯 (Letitia James) 领导一项新调查。 我在周五观看了他们的新闻发布会。我从中得出的一个谨慎的结论是，认为七名被控的兄弟会成员——顺便提一句，并非所有人都被指控与 Jane Doe 发生性行为——能够得到公正处理的可能性非常小，因为 Letitia James 已经公开表示，并发表声明，不仅仅是表示对受害者的支持，而几乎完全接受受害者所说的内容。嗯，这是，我们，是不是在走向另一种程序正义的灾难，这在之前的一些案例中已经发生过，比如《滚石》、Ducal Cross 等等。Liz，我先把话题交给你。

Well, my thought is pretty much everything Tish James touches turns to shit. So I'm not feeling especially optimistic about that. I also get the sense that part of the reason why Kathy Hochul is trying to act like the prosecutor or the Tompkins County District Attorney has done such a poor job is mostly because she wants to take advantage of being able to make headlines like this one, the CNN headline, I want the truth. New York governor vows to unravel failures in Cornell sexual assault investigation. I get the sense that this is very much a political play by Hochul. Maybe it's possible her motives are good deep down, but I think she also sees it as an opportunity to try to get some very favorable headlines and be seen a certain kind of way. One thing that I just keep thinking about with all of this as the sort of cultural phenomenon here is. All the legal stuff aside, which I feel like you're very, you know, equipped to comment on, Robby. One of the texts between Jane Doe and one of the fraternity brothers is Jane basically saying, it'll get better. And verbatim, everyone needs to grow up because sexuality and sex and shit is changing and stuff like this is going to become more common. I think that's a very telling line, and I don't know why it popped into my head today. I think probably because I was listening to Carly Simon and Elton John. But that scene from that movie Almost Famous, which is about bands like the great rock bands of the 70s and the Band-Aid phenomenon, these groupies, these roadies, these girls who would travel with th This is a very, very common tale, but the thing that really is happening now is we're seeing these casual sexual encounters happening at scale, both in terms of the number of people who are doing this type of thing, but also the boldness and intensity and number of sex acts, as well as the number of partners. So I think the fact that this has been termed a gangbang, that there's seven people who were reportedly involved... I think it's a tale of a party gone wrong and a sexual encounter gone wrong and profound regret from this woman. I just feel like everyone behaved very poorly here, but it's sort of a tale of like our culture gone astray and sexual morals and ethics more than it is a tale of the law.

中文：好吧，我的想法是，蒂什·詹姆斯接触到的所有东西几乎都会变成狗屎。 所以我对此并不感到特别乐观。 我还感觉到，凯西·霍赫尔（Kathy Hochul）试图表现得像检察官或汤普金斯县地方检察官做得如此糟糕，部分原因主要是因为她想利用能够成为像这样的头条新闻，CNN 头条，我想要真相。 纽约州州长发誓要揭开康奈尔大学性侵犯调查失败的真相。 我觉得这在很大程度上是霍赫尔的政治剧。 也许她内心深处的动机是好的，但我认为她也认为这是一个机会，试图获得一些非常有利的头条新闻并以某种方式被人看待。 作为一种文化现象，我一直在思考的一件事是。 撇开所有法律问题不谈，我觉得你非常有能力对此发表评论，罗比。 简·无名氏和一位兄弟会兄弟之间的短信之一是简基本上说，情况会好起来的。 逐字逐句地讲，每个人都需要成长，因为性行为和性行为正在发生变化，这样的事情将会变得更加普遍。 我认为这是一句非常有说服力的台词，但我不知道为什么它今天突然出现在我的脑海中。 我想可能是因为我在听卡莉·西蒙和埃尔顿·约翰的音乐。 但是那部电影《几近成名》中的那个场景，讲的是像 70 年代伟大摇滚乐队这样的乐队，以及创可贴现象，这些追星女孩，这些路队，这些会跟随乐队到处旅行的女孩……这是一个非常非常常见的故事，但现在真正发生的事情是，我们看到这些随意的性接触在规模上发生，无论是在进行这种事情的人数上，还是在大胆性、强度、性行为数量以及性伴侣数量上。因此，我认为被称为群交的事实，据报道有七个人参与……我认为这是一个派对出错和性接触出错、以及这位女性深刻后悔的故事。我只是觉得每个人在这里的行为都非常糟糕，但这更像是我们的文化走偏了，以及性道德和伦理的问题，而不是法律的问题的故事。

Yeah, Reem, when you read, you know, the details in the police report that first the district attorney put out to kind of absolve himself, say, well, I didn't prosecute because, you know, read what I read, what the police prepared for me, and it doesn't actually allege a crime. She uses the language of consent. She says that she agreed to take drugs, ketamine. She agreed to have a threesome. She agreed to later. When they tried to include more people, she said no. When she wanted to be over, it was over. That's what s Doxing and harassing, not only the accused fraternity brothers whose names and faces are everywhere, they've all been fired from their jobs, but also people just happen to have the same name as them.

中文：是的，Reem，当你阅读警方报告的细节时，你知道，这份报告最初是地区检察官发布的，旨在为自己辩解，说，好吧，我没有起诉，因为，你知道，读我读过的，警察为我准备的材料，实际上并没有指控犯罪。她使用了“同意”的说法。她说她同意服用药物氯胺酮。她同意参与三人性行为。她后来同意。当他们试图包括更多人时，她说不。当她想结束时，就结束了。这就是所谓的网络暴露和骚扰，不仅针对那些被指控的兄弟会成员，他们的名字和面孔到处都是，他们都被开除了，而且还针对仅仅是碰巧与他们同名的人。

The Free Press had an insane story about a family being tormented by online crazy people, totally unrelated to the case, who just has the same name as one of the fraternity brothers. Yeah, it's very tragic. I mean, obviously, no matter what has happened, this woman, Jane Doe, is very clearly traumatized by what happened. I do think that in some of the messages that she sent to the people that have been accused, she did also say, you know, all of the social shaming that came afterwards. She was crying every day, crying herself to sleep at night. And I do think that, you know, obviously this woman is traumatized from the situation. However, as you've just said, Robby, we have no idea what the details actually are. And it does seem as though everybody on the internet knows what's going on more than even the people involved in the case do. And I do think that fundamentally, we have to make sure that there is a fair trial. And I think it's quite tragic that These seven men have had their names, their faces completely plastered all over the internet with absolutely no... They've not been charged of anything yet. And I do think that that is really important to make that point. I also think that, I mean, I disagree wi And I do think it's, you know, when you're at the age of 20, you're at university and you might want to do things. But unfortunately, the social shaming that comes along with that is far more vicious. And clearly, she wasn't equipped to deal with that. I think regardless of what happens and regardless of the outcome of the trial. It's real tragic that any woman is even, you know, the sort of question of whether or not she wanted this or indeed if. I've seen so many articles online of people saying, well, obviously a woman would never want to gangbang. And it's like, well, there clearly are many women that are interested in this kind of sexual behavior. And I don't think that we should judge them for that. One thing I do think we need to touch on is the fact that Kathy Hochul is now looking at removing this loophole, well, she's calling it a loophole, the voluntary intoxication loophole. Yeah, I definitely want to talk about that.

中文：《自由报》曾报道过一个疯狂的故事，讲述了一个家庭被网络疯子折磨的故事，这些疯子与案件完全无关，只是与兄弟会的一位兄弟同名。 是啊，非常悲剧。 我的意思是，显然，无论发生了什么，这个女人，简·无名氏，显然因所发生的事情而受到了创伤。 我确实认为，在她向被指控的人发送的一些信息中，她也确实说过，你知道，随后发生的所有社会羞辱。 她每天都哭着，晚上哭着入睡。 我确实认为，你知道，显然这个女人因这种情况而受到了创伤。 然而，正如你刚才所说，罗比，我们不知道具体细节是什么。 似乎互联网上的每个人都比涉案人员更了解正在发生的事情。 我确实认为，从根本上来说，我们必须确保公平审判。 我认为这是相当悲惨的，这七个人的名字、他们的脸完全贴在互联网上，绝对没有……他们还没有被指控任何罪名。 我确实认为阐明这一点非常重要。 我还认为，我的意思是，我不同意 wi 我确实认为，你知道，当你 20 岁的时候，你在大学，你可能想做一些事情。 但不幸的是，随之而来的社会羞辱更加恶毒。 显然，她没有能力应对这个问题。 我认为无论发生什么，无论审判结果如何。 真正的悲剧是，任何一个女人都会有这样的问题：她是否想要这个，或者是否真的想要这个。 我在网上看到很多文章，人们说，好吧，显然女人永远不会想要轮奸。 而且就像，好吧，显然有很多女性对这种性行为感兴趣。我认为我们不应该因此而去评判她们。我认为我们确实需要谈到的一件事情是，凯西·霍胡尔现在正在考虑取消这个漏洞，她称之为漏洞，即自愿性醉酒漏洞。是的，我确实想谈谈这个问题。

So, effectively, what she is saying is that if you voluntarily choose to consume alcohol and drugs, you cannot then consent to sex, which is obviously completely ludicrous. Right, she doesn't even understand, I'm not sure she's aware of what the law is currently and, like, why this is a loophole. Yeah, actually, maybe we'll circle back to that in a minute. Liz, did you want to follow up? Yeah, go ahead. I wasn't saying that there's something wrong with a woman doing that. This is a libertarian publication. This is not a Catholic publication. I would be delighted to come on your local Catholic podcast any old time.

中文：所以，她实际上是在说，如果你自愿选择饮酒和吸毒，你就不能同意发生性关系，这显然是完全荒谬的。对吧，她甚至不理解，我不确定她是否知道当前的法律是什么，以及为什么这是一个漏洞。嗯，事实上，也许我们一会儿会回到这个话题。Liz，你想跟进吗？好吧，请讲。我不是在说一个女人那样做有什么问题。这是一本自由主义的出版物，这不是一本天主教的出版物。我很乐意随时参加你们本地的天主教播客节目。

The argument that I am making more specifically is that this is a trope. This is a theme. This is a tale as old as time. This idea of women engaging in these encounters. And they're being a hefty dose of regret, whether that regret is tied to the sexual encounter itself or the public shaming that happens after. And based off of this woman's account changing, where she initially, after the incident, described it as consensual and then, you know, more than two weeks later, went and tried to request a rape kit and talked to the police. To me, this looks like a situation where regret played a big part. And I'm saying that that is not a new thing, but that the intensity and sort of lurid detail of the sexual encounter, as well as the frequency with which this occurs, appears to be a thing that is becoming more prominent and prevalent. The social shaming...

中文：我更具体地说，这是一个陈词滥调。这是一个主题。这是一个古老的故事。女性参与这些接触的想法。她们表现出大量的后悔，无论是与性接触本身有关，还是与之后发生的公开羞辱有关。根据这位女性的说法变化，她最初在事件发生后称这是双方自愿的，然后，你知道，两个多星期后，她试图申请强奸检材并与警方交谈。在我看来，这似乎是一个后悔起了很大作用的情况。我想说这并不是新鲜事，但性经历的强度和有些耸人听闻的细节，以及发生频率，似乎正变得越来越突出和普遍。社会羞辱......

10:00 - 20:00

Has to be part of it to some degree, though, right? Because, I mean, I'm not disagreeing with you, Liz, but if you read the text messages that she sent that were released by the New York Times, what it seems to me is that this is being discussed that this happened. Her sorority sisters know. The fraternity brothers themselves clearly talked about it. I mean, they sent messages about it, really disgusting messages about it. So she and she talks about the damage to her reputation. That is a subject she raises regularly.

中文：不过，这在某种程度上必须是其中的一部分，对吧？因为，我的意思是，我并不是不同意你，Liz，但如果你读一下《纽约时报》发布的她发的短信，对我来说看起来，这是在讨论这件事的发生。她的姐妹会姐妹们都知道。兄弟会的兄弟们显然也谈论过这件事。我的意思是，他们发了关于这件事的信息，真的很恶心的信息。所以她谈到了对她名誉的损害。这个话题是她经常提出的。

Before she starts considering it, or at least publicly considers it non-consensual, and I think that's part of it, and that reflects very poorly on everyone on the campus, that you would engage in judging behavior of that nature. This is also just how society works. I mean, you are rewarded socially for things that are difficult. For a woman to have sex with loads of men, it's not very difficult. For the average woman to have sex with loads of men, it's not very difficult. For the average man to have sex with loads of women, it is more difficult. And so you are socially rewarded for what is difficult. For these men showing off on Snapchat, posting about it online, telling all of their friends, of course they're going to do that because they've achieved something in their life.

中文：在她开始考虑，或者至少公开认为这是非自愿的，我认为这也是原因之一，这也让校园里所有人都很难受，因为你会去评判这种行为。这也是社会的运作方式。我的意思是，你会因为困难的事情而获得社交奖励。对女性来说，和很多男人发生关系并不难。对普通女性来说，和很多男人发生关系也不难。而普通男性和很多女性发生关系，则更难。所以你会因为困难而获得社会奖励。对于这些在 Snapchat 上炫耀、在线发布、告诉所有朋友的男人来说，他们当然会这么做，因为他们在生活中取得了成就。

That was really wrong. I will go to Zach. That was really wrong. But the question of the, you know, for Letitia James was a crime committed. And that is different. Not necessarily different, but can be very different from and there was just bad behavior. Zach, go ahead.

中文：那真的很错误。我会去找扎克。那真的很错误。但关于……你知道，对于莱蒂西亚·詹姆斯来说，这是一起犯罪行为。这是不同的。不一定完全不同，但可能与只是行为不当有很大差别。扎克，请继续。

I mean, I do feel the need to state the obvious as maybe like as a sort of, I don't know. Elder figure, big brother, father. It's just like, this is unacceptable behavior regardless of the legal questions. And the DA's initial statement not to pursue a crime made that clear, I think, in a really good way that we can look at this as deplorable and disgusting and still not conclude that it is necessarily a crime. I think the Snapchat... Conversations in particular are what have enraged a lot of people about this. Like, what happened to this woman was not right. And many of these guys acted horribly and that the gloating in particular is disgusting and sort of speaks to the mindset and what she might have experienced afterwards because she's being treated as some sort of trophy or, you know, not even a trophy, something much worse than that. So, I mean, I know there's been this sort of sub-debate about whether it's pornography that's caused this coarsening or social media. I think it's actually the meeting of these two things, the social mediasation of everything, including group sex, has led to this kind of terrible spectacle. And regards to Letitia James, this is just, you know, kind of upping the... The spectacle, I guess. It's creating, this is not about a pursuit of justice at this point, appointing a grandstander to a complicated legal case about the boundaries of consent while voluntarily intoxicated. That's not what any of it is about at this point. Just like with the Lindsay Clancy case, it's now a full-on culture war and gender war. And like you, Robby, I'm skeptical that a fair trial is even possible now this far after the event with someone like James at the head, possibly tainted jury pool. It's kind of another blow to the trustworthiness or I guess faith in our justice system, unfortunately. Right. And I always tell people, you know, a lawsuit establishes nothing. Anyone can bring a lawsuit against anyone for any reason. You can get an attorney to prepare one for you. So it's not a none of these are findings of facts, what she alleges now, nor does that mean they are not true. It could absolutely be the case. And it could be the case the charges are it could be the case the charges are warranted against some of them.

中文：我的意思是，我确实觉得有必要陈述显而易见的事情，就像某种“我不知道”一样。 长辈的形象，大哥，父亲。 就像，无论法律问题如何，这都是不可接受的行为。 我认为，地方检察官最初的不追究犯罪行为的声明以一种非常好的方式清楚地表明了这一点，我们可以将这视为可悲和令人厌恶的，但仍然不能得出这必然是犯罪的结论。 我认为 Snapchat...尤其是对话激怒了很多人。 就像，这个女人发生的事情是不对的。 这些人中的许多人表现得很糟糕，这种幸灾乐祸的行为尤其令人厌恶，这在某种程度上说明了她的心态以及她之后可能经历的事情，因为她被视为某种战利品，或者，你知道，甚至不是战利品，比这更糟糕的东西。 所以，我的意思是，我知道存在这样的争论：到底是色情作品还是社交媒体导致了这种粗俗。 我认为这实际上是这两件事的结合，一切的社交媒体化，包括群交，导致了这种可怕的景象。 至于利蒂希娅·詹姆斯，我想，这只是，你知道，有点提升......奇观。 它正在创造，这不是为了追求正义，而是任命一个旁观者来处理一个复杂的法律案件，该案件涉及自愿醉酒时同意的界限。 目前这还不是重点。 就像林赛·克兰西案一样，现在这是一场全面的文化战争和性别战争。 和你一样，罗比，我怀疑在事件发生这么久之后，由像詹姆斯这样的人领导的公平审判是否可能，陪审团可能受到污染。 不幸的是，这对我们的司法系统的可信度，或者说信任，又是一次打击。对。我总是告诉人们，诉讼本身并不能证明任何事情。任何人都可以因任何原因对任何人提起诉讼。你可以请一个律师帮你准备诉讼。所以，这些都不是事实认定，她现在声称的情况，也不意味着这些情况不真实。完全有可能是真的，也可能有些指控确实是对某些人的正当指控。

And not others, that there was consensual interaction. I think the language from the police statement is much less equivocal, much clearer for the first sexual encounter than for the second sexual encounter, for instance. So there could be some degree of nuance here, but I don't trust Letitia James to get it all. Additionally, I did want to go into more detail on this so-called intoxication loophole that Reem brought up, because now this is a policy component where not just Hochul, but I saw Abdul El-Sayed tweeting about this and others, where they're missing the plot completely. They're making it sound like it's what you said, Reem, So you didn't know you were taking drugs, you were forced to take them, or if you actually pass out, then consent is withdrawn. But unless it falls into those categories, if you willingly take drugs or alcohol and you get quite intoxicated because of it, but you don't pass out, the sexual contact you have is not assumed to be non-consensual. It's not just the law in New York, it's the law, I think, in most states. It's in 19 states, I believe, as well as New York. Right, so...

中文：而不是其他人，这是双方同意的互动。 例如，我认为警方声明中的语言对于第一次性接触比第二次性接触要明确得多，更加清晰。 因此，这里可能存在某种程度的细微差别，但我不相信利蒂西亚·詹姆斯能理解这一切。 此外，我确实想更详细地了解雷姆提出的这个所谓的中毒漏洞，因为现在这是一个政策组成部分，不仅是 Hochul，而且我看到 Abdul El-Sayed 也在推特上谈论了这个问题和其他人，他们完全错过了这个情节。 他们听起来就像你说的那样，雷姆，所以你不知道你正在吸毒，你是被迫吸毒的，或者如果你真的昏倒了，那么同意就会被撤回。 但除非属于这些类别，否则如果您自愿吸毒或酗酒，并且因此而喝得酩酊大醉，但您没有昏倒，则不会认为您的性接触是非自愿的。 这不仅是纽约的法律，我认为也是大多数州的法律。 我相信在 19 个州都有，还有纽约。 对了，所以……

I mean, it's obviously ludicrous to effectively say... What else can you do? Yeah, exactly. And I do think that this does open up to so many... I mean, the more laws that you add to this particular type of crime, the far more difficult it is to actually prosecute those legitimate crimes. And of course, we don't have to say this, rape and sexual assault are horrific crimes that have awful traumatizing consequences on the victims.

中文：我的意思是，明显地说……这几乎是荒谬的。你还能做什么呢？是的，确实如此。我确实认为，这确实会带来很多……我的意思是，你给这种特定类型的犯罪增加的法律越多，实际上起诉那些合法犯罪就越困难。当然，我们不必多说，强奸和性侵是可怕的犯罪，对受害者造成可怕的创伤性后果。

And yet the more that we sort of effectively say that, you know, people, men and women, no matter who they are, are incapable of consent if they voluntarily choose to consume alcohol and drugs, which, by the way, does also apply to the Cornell 7 because they were also under the influence of drugs. Right, that would go both ways.

中文：然而，我们越是有效地说，人们，无论男女，不管是谁，如果他们自愿选择消费酒精和药物，就无法同意，而顺便说一下，这也适用于康奈尔七名学生，因为他们当时也受药物影响。对吧，这两方面都适用。

Did Jane Doe sexually assault them then because they were incapable of consenting? If both parties are incapable of consenting because they've both voluntarily chosen to consume alcohol and drugs, where does this land us? I mean, it's just preposterous.

中文：那么，简·多是否因为他们无法同意而对他们进行了性侵犯？如果双方都无法同意，因为他们都自愿选择了饮酒和吸毒，那么这将把我们置于什么境地？我的意思是，这简直荒谬。

One of them is making that claim. They have all denied responsibility, and one of them has said that he was incapacitated by drugs and alcohol, or at least by alcohol, when the encounter occurred, and he could not have given his consent. So one of them is actually explicitly making that argument. Now, again, that argument is not valid because this law, the law is the way it is now. So really, Kathy Ockel is just saying she wants to change the law. That wouldn't, you couldn't apply that retroactively anyway.

中文：其中一个人提出了那个主张。他们都否认责任，其中一个人说在发生接触时他因药物和酒精，或者至少是酒精的影响而失去了能力，因此他无法给予同意。所以其中一个人实际上是在明确提出那个论点。再说一次，这个论点是无效的，因为法律就是现在这样的。所以实际上，凯西·奥克尔只是说她想要改变法律。即使如此，你也无法将其溯及适用。

I have a weird question that maybe you guys know because I'm not a very active drug user. So ketamine has caught on pretty massively, especially among younger people. In the last, I would peg it to be like five years or so, maybe a little longer among more intense drug circles. Does the popularity and sort of increased consumption of ketamine as opposed to alcohol or weed or whatever... Play any role in this? Do you? I don't think that there is an increased consumption.

中文：我有一个奇怪的问题，也许你们知道答案，因为我不是一个很活跃的吸毒者。氯胺酮已经相当流行，尤其是在年轻人中。在过去，我估计大约五年左右，或者在更激烈的毒品圈子里可能更久。氯胺酮的流行以及相比酒精或大麻等的使用增加……在这方面起到任何作用吗？你觉得呢？我不认为有增加使用量。

Oh, I think there is. Oh, I think there is.

中文：哦，我觉得是的。哦，我觉得是的。

Of ketamine specifically.

中文：特别是氯胺酮。

Of ketamine specifically, yeah.

中文：特别是关于氯胺酮，是的。

Ketamine's become hugely popular. Ketamine's the new cocaine.

中文：氯胺酮已经变得非常流行。氯胺酮是新的可卡因。

But of drug safe rule? No, but ketamine is different. Ketamine has a compared, you know, co...

中文：但关于药物安全规则呢？不，不过氯胺酮不同。氯胺酮有一个比较，你知道，协…

Safer than coke in like an abstract, although if you like got behind the wheel of a car on ketamine, it would be way more dangerous probably is where I would land on that. It was the era of weed and the era of, you know, the last gasps of the cocaine era. I think it is the era of ketamine now. Yeah, I guess there's never a last gasp for the era of cocaine. You know, it's the drug eternal.

中文：从某种抽象意义上讲，比可乐更安全，虽然如果你在氯胺酮的作用下开车，那可能会危险得多，我大概会这样认为。那是大麻的时代，也是可卡因时代的最后喘息时期。我觉得现在是氯胺酮的时代。嗯，我猜说可卡因的时代永远不会有最后的喘息期，你知道的，这是永恒的毒品。

Zach, can you say more about the point you made? Because maybe we can get into a little discussion of that. Crediting the social media and pornography. Emma Camp, a former reasoner, very successful at the Wall Street Journal, makes great videos, did have a piece in the Wall Street Journal kind of blaming pornography culture, which I have some

中文：扎克，你能多说说你提到的观点吗？因为也许我们可以就此展开一点讨论。归因于社交媒体和色情。艾玛·坎普，一位前《理性主义者》，在《华尔街日报》非常成功，制作了很棒的视频，她确实在《华尔街日报》发表过一篇文章，有点责怪色情文化，我对此有一些

pushback to I could get into, but I'll let you kind of expound on that thought first. Yeah, I mean, I think if we just look historically at whether these sort of Robby Soave, Reem Ibrahim, and Zach Weissmueller. It's not only that, so it creates like this perfect paper trail from a legal standpoint, but also it creates a, just like with everything, people are trying to, Prove themselves and score clout points. And in this case, they're doing it by saying what you can do to this woman who's drunken on ketamine in one of the frat rooms. And it's just an unfortunate byproduct of the digital age, I guess. I don't think that necessarily means it has anything to do with pornography at all. I mean, I think perhaps the social shaming is exacerbated by social media in that just information can travel more quickly. And so if you are on campus, you can post a photo immediately and everybody else is aware of what's going on. You can text your friends and that communication is sent immediately, whereas social shaming in sort of 200 years ago, even, would have had to be sent by letter or by word of mouth, which is far more difficult to... The prominent gangbangs of the past year or so, what was this?

中文：推回我可以进入，但我会让你先解释一下这个想法。 是的，我的意思是，我想如果我们从历史的角度来看是否是罗比·索阿夫、雷姆·易卜拉欣和扎克·韦斯穆勒这样的人。 不仅如此，从法律的角度来看，它创造了完美的书面记录，而且它还创造了一种，就像人们试图证明自己并获得影响力的一切一样。 在这种情况下，他们的做法是告诉这位在兄弟会房间里喝醉了氯胺酮的女人你可以做什么。 我想，这只是数字时代的一个不幸的副产品。 我认为这并不一定意味着它与色情有任何关系。 我的意思是，我认为社交媒体可能加剧了社会羞辱，因为信息可以更快地传播。 因此，如果您在校园内，您可以立即发布照片，其他人都知道发生了什么。 你可以给你的朋友发短信，信息会立即发送，而在 200 年前，社交羞辱甚至必须通过信件或口头方式发送，这要困难得多……过去一年左右的著名轮奸事件，这是什么？

20:00 - 30:00

They're never going to let us host this again, Zach.

中文：扎克，他们永远不会再让我们举办这个了。

Was this OnlyFans influencer who did it for what? The social media attention.

中文：这个 OnlyFans 网红这么做是为了什么？就是为了社交媒体上的关注。

Are you talking about Billy Phillips trying to have sex with a thousand men over the course of- Bonnie Blue. Bonnie Blue, yeah. The British girls are out there and they are ready for it. The only gangbang I follow is our friend Ayla, Zach. That's the most famous one in our hearts.

中文：你是在说比利·菲利普斯试图在一段时间内和一千个男人发生性关系吗——邦妮·布鲁。邦妮·布鲁，是的。英国女孩们在那儿，她们已经准备好了。我唯一关注的群交是我们的朋友艾拉，扎克。那是在我们心中最著名的一个。

Has grown and we can have opinions about whether that's good or bad or fine in some ways, maybe bad in others, where I and actually, I don't even think you were arguing against this, Zach, but my my skepticism is that has fundamentally changed actually the practice of how young people are engaging in these things, which was the premise of Emma's article and the premise of a lot of takes I saw on social media for exactly the reason you said, you know, if you if a. Invading army conquers some town in Germany during the 30 Years War. There is huge amounts of sexual assault occurring, right? And they had no pornography to inspire them to do that. It's just the innately violent behavior of the male species under certain conditions. What I would suspect actually is that the rise of pornography is... Our ease of access to it has probably just decreased the amount of sex people have anyway because there is this as an alternative to doing that. So it wouldn't surprise me if like violent video games, instead of being an accelerant of the phenomenon, is actually like a depressor of the phenomenon because the people who would be most interested in that, in violence, have this as an outlet instead. Which is not to say it's all... Wonderful and great that we have a culture that works like this. I'm just, I'm doubtful it contributes to this specific thing.

中文：已经成长了，我们可以对这在某些方面是好是坏或好，在其他方面可能是坏有意见，实际上，我什至不认为你在反对这一点，扎克，但我的怀疑是，这实际上从根本上改变了年轻人参与这些事情的做法，这是艾玛文章的前提，也是我在社交媒体上看到的很多镜头的前提，其原因正是你所说的，你知道，如果你是的话。 三十年战争期间，侵略军占领了德国的一些城镇。 发生了大量的性侵犯，对吗？ 他们没有色情内容来激励他们这样做。 这只是雄性物种在某些条件下与生俱来的暴力行为。 我实际上怀疑的是，色情作品的兴起是……我们对色情作品的便捷性可能只是减少了人们的性行为数量，因为有这样的替代品。 因此，如果暴力电子游戏不是这种现象的促进剂，而是这种现象的抑制剂，我不会感到惊讶，因为那些对暴力最感兴趣的人将其作为一种发泄方式。 这并不是说这就是全部……我们拥有这样的文化真是太棒了。 我只是，我怀疑它是否对这件具体事情有所贡献。

Yeah, I mean, I would go even further than that. I think that there is, I don't really understand why people are associating.

中文：是的，我的意思是，我甚至会更进一步。我觉得有，我真的不理解为什么人们会把它联系在一起。

It's because they don't like it and this is a bad thing. So they say, this is the thing I don't like and this is a bad thing.

中文：这是因为他们不喜欢它，而这是件坏事。所以他们说，这是我不喜欢的东西，而这是件坏事。

Exactly. Well, if you already don't like porn and you already are sort of part of the sort of cultural porn wars, I suppose, then you can obviously then make the association. But I don't think that there is any evidence that porn has anything to do with it. This particular horrific case at all, I don't think it has anything to do with it. I think that potentially social shaming and social media sort of being aided by social media's aiding shaming definitely may have had a part to play. But I don't think that associating this case with porn has any evidence in its basis at all. I would push back on this a little bit. I think it's very hard to gather super solid evidence trying to establish a causal link here. But I do think that there are a few sort of well-documented phenomena, if you want to get really crass and specific here, like rise of anal sex among heterosexuals. We'll be right back. I'm curious about the degree to which these rises that have been documented are true, and I am curious about where they are coming from, if not from porn. Because it's possible, like there is the case we made that young women have been so sexually repressed for so long that actually what they have been wanting is to be choked out during sex at the age of 18. But... I'm a little bit skeptical of that. At least that at scale, that as like the dominant preference. But it isn't. I mean, it isn't the dominant preference. Or the submissive preference, rather. I'm sorry, I did not set myself up for that one. That one just came to me. But no, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask these types of questions. And yes, I have an ax to grind with porn. I think it's kind of bad, you know? Crucify me. But I do think that there is an interesting... I don't think it's what I would really like. A more just world would have more reliable data on some of these things and attempt to really get to the heart of where some of these emergent trends and preferences are coming from. And I don't think it's unreasonable to say in the absence of a clear causal link, maybe it's the prevalence of porn and the sort of stuntiness of porn that we've seen arise in in the last few years.

中文：确切地。 好吧，如果你已经不喜欢色情片，并且你已经成为色情文化战争的一部分，我想，那么你显然可以建立这种联系。 但我不认为有任何证据表明色情片与此有任何关系。 这起特别可怕的案件根本不存在，我不认为它与此有任何关系。 我认为潜在的社会羞辱和社交媒体在社交媒体帮助羞辱的帮助下肯定可能发挥了一定作用。 但我认为将此案与色情联系起来根本没有任何证据依据。 我会稍微反驳这一点。 我认为很难收集超级可靠的证据来试图建立因果关系。 但我确实认为，如果你想在这里变得粗鲁和具体的话，有一些有据可查的现象，比如异性恋者中肛交的兴起。 我们马上回来。 我很好奇所记录的这些增长的真实程度，我很好奇它们来自哪里，如果不是来自色情片的话。 因为这是有可能的，就像我们所说的那样，年轻女性长期以来一直受到性压抑，实际上她们一直想要的是在 18 岁时在性行为中被窒息。但是……我对此有点怀疑。 至少在规模上是这样，就像占主导地位的偏好一样。 但事实并非如此。 我的意思是，这不是主导偏好。 或者更确切地说，是顺从的偏好。 抱歉，我没有为那件事做好准备。 那个人刚刚来找我。 但不，我认为提出这些类型的问题并不是没有道理的。 是的，我对色情片有兴趣。 我觉得这有点糟糕，你知道吗？ 把我钉在十字架上。 但我确实认为有一个有趣的......我不认为这是我真正喜欢的。 一个更公正的世界会对这些事情中的一些拥有更可靠的数据，并试图真正弄清这些新出现的趋势和偏好来自哪里。我认为在缺乏明确因果关系的情况下，说这些可能与色情内容的普及以及我们在过去几年中看到的色情内容所呈现出的某种夸张特征有关，并不不合理。

Zach, you and I have written a lot about cancel culture and social media phenomena. And what I found a little bit interesting this time around with this canceling going on, so I endured a little bit of it, not to be like, oh, poor me, I'm such a victim. Not all saying that. I've done this, you know, many times they've come after me on social media. It's fine. But this time, because I had a clip go viral arguing with Lindsey Granger, my host on Rising about this, and it got clipped to Instagram. And I guess Instagram is all full of feminist type left people who thought I was being really callous and... I was getting like thousands of hateful messages and I had like my address shared. It was crazy. But just on Instagram, not on Twitter, not on YouTube.

中文：扎克，你我都写过很多关于“取消文化”和社交媒体现象的文章。这次关于这种取消行为，我觉得有一点有趣，所以我稍微经历了一点，不是想说，哎呀，可怜的我，我是受害者。并不是这么说。我已经经历过很多次了，你知道，他们在社交媒体上找过我。这没关系。但这次，因为我和《Rising》的主持人林赛·格兰杰发生争论的视频片段病毒式传播，被剪辑到 Instagram 上。我想 Instagram 上全是那种女权主义类型的左派，他们觉得我真的很冷漠……我收到了成千上万条充满仇恨的信息，还有人公开了我的地址。太疯狂了。但只是 Instagram 上，不是在 Twitter，也不是在 YouTube 上。

And people thought we were a couple.

中文：而且人们还以为我们是一对。

What? People thought that we were a couple. Yeah, they commented on Reem's photo too. It was like, look out for him. Which is insane, but that's all on Instagram. And then like on Twitter, it's most people agree with me, you know, in my call for let's follow the facts, let's have due process, etc. Whereas so now almost like the canceling is kind of platform specific or siloed to the platform, which I found really fascinating. That hadn't quite occurred to me that that's where we'd gotten to.

中文：什么？人们以为我们是一对。是的，他们也评论了 Reem 的照片。就像是在说，小心他一样。这太疯狂了，但这些都只是 Instagram 上的事情。然后在 Twitter 上，大多数人同意我的观点，你知道的，我呼吁大家让我们遵循事实，进行正当程序等等。而现在几乎可以说，取消文化在不同平台上是特定的，或者说局限在各自的平台上，我觉得这真的很有趣。我以前没想到我们会发展到这种地步。

Yeah, I mean, obviously the post-Elon Twitter has created that sort of siloing effect and then also layered on top of that, thinking about the material differences between X and Instagram, one being a primarily visual medium versus text-based. Perhaps that also explains the kind of, I don't know, level of analysis and reaction.

中文：是的，我的意思是，很明显，埃隆之后的推特已经造成了那种孤岛效应，然后再加上考虑到 X 和 Instagram 之间的实际差异，一个主要是视觉媒介，另一个是以文本为主。也许这也解释了某种程度上，我不知道，分析和反应的水平。

My face inspires hatred. My words inspire support, I guess.

中文：我的脸令人憎恨。我的话语激发支持，我想。

That face is just so punchable on Instagram.

中文：在 Instagram 上那个脸真想揍一拳。

I want you to get canceled on Pinterest, Robby.

中文：我希望你在 Pinterest 上被封禁，罗比。

Yeah? Have you been canceled on Pinterest, Liz? No. Why would I use Pinterest? I'm not a girl. Come on, Robby.

中文：是吗？你在 Pinterest 上被取消关注了吗，Liz？没有。我为什么要用 Pinterest？我不是女孩。拜托，Robby。

I use Pinterest for, like, Halloween costumes. Outfit inspo?

中文：我用 Pinterest 来找万圣节服装，服装灵感？

Yeah. Good stuff. All right. I think we, have we talked this subject to death? Yes, I believe we have. We'll take a quick break. Be back in a minute.

中文：是的。好东西。好吧。我想我们，这个话题我们已经讨论透了？是的，我相信我们已经讨论透了。我们休息一下，很快回来。

Hey, Reason Roundtable listeners, check out the Bound by Oath podcast. It's brought to you by our friends at the Institute for Justice. Bound by Oath brings you the true stories behind some of the biggest cases in Supreme Court history. Stories like the case of John Harris Jr. He was a radical activist arrested in 1966 for handing out flyers in protest of a fatal police shooting in Los Angeles. The Supreme Court didn't rule on his arrest, and yet it changed how people can enforce the Constitution today. The show just wrapped up its fourth season, which is about how federal courts avoid their duty to say what the law actually means. But check out the earlier seasons, too. They're about property rights, immunity doctrines that shield the government from accountability, and the 14th Amendment. Bound by Oath is available wherever you get your podcasts. That's Bound by Oath, available at reputable podcast platforms everywhere.

中文：嘿，Reason Roundtable 的听众们，来看看《受誓约束》播客吧。它由我们的朋友——正义研究所带给大家。《受誓约束》为你呈现一些最高法院历史上最大案件背后的真实故事。比如约翰·哈里斯 Jr. 的案件。他是一名激进活动家，1966 年因在洛杉矶分发传单抗议致命警察枪击事件而被捕。最高法院没有对他的逮捕作出裁决，但此案却改变了今天人们如何执行宪法。该节目刚刚结束第四季，内容是关于联邦法院如何避免履行说明法律真正含义的义务。不过也别忘了看看早期的季节，它们讲述的是财产权、保护政府免于问责的豁免原则，以及第十四修正案。《受誓约束》在你获取播客的地方都可以收听。也就是，《受誓约束》在各大知名播客平台都可以收听。

All right, another really thrilling and cheery and all smiles subject. We've moved on from graphic sexual assault to a botched execution that is involving Christa Pike, a convicted murderer in Tennessee who was scheduled to receive the death penalty but survived the lethal injection in a state that has been described as... Not good, painful, or brain damaged in some way, because they then took her to the hospital to revive her, someone the state is trying to kill. Christian Brischke and I were talking about this on Freed Up, and we were being very savage about how the government has... I am personally kind of indifferent on the death penalty, but if we are going to execute someone, we should not screw it up horrifically such that they linger in an even worse state. Seems...

中文：好吧，又是一个非常刺激、愉快、充满笑容的话题。我们已经从血腥的性侵案件转向了一起涉及克里斯塔·派克（Christa Pike）的失败执行案件。她是田纳西州的一名被判谋杀罪的罪犯，原本计划接受死刑注射，但在注射过程中幸存下来。这个州被描述为……不好、痛苦，或者某种程度上脑部受损，因为之后她被送往医院进行复苏，而这人正是国家试图处死的人。克里斯蒂安·布里施克（Christian Brischke）和我在《Freed Up》节目中讨论过此事，我们对政府的行为表现得很苛刻……我个人对死刑持某种程度的无所谓态度，但如果我们要执行死刑，就不应该搞得如此惨烈，让他们陷入更糟糕的状态。似乎……

30:00 - 40:00

Pretty straightforward to me. Zach, I'll start with you. Am I wrong? I don't think so. No, I mean, one of the few things government's usually really good at is killing people. So it's amazing that even that was botched here. Accidentally, they can kill people successfully, but on purpose, for a legitimate state purpose, they cannot. But yeah, I mean, I guess it's kind of a desire to sanitize what's happening by making it seem clinical with the lethal injections, even though I saw a chart that was being shared around from the Death Penalty Information Center that it's actually the most likely. To be botched, a firing squad is the least likely, followed by electrocution. But those methods make us confront what's happening much more brutally and viscerally. And to be honest, Robby, I do oppose the death penalty. It's not because I have serious moral qualms about executing murderers. I just think that... In effect, so like when you murder someone, I think you do in effect cede your rights when you cross that line. But I think that the state, just the possibility of a state executing an innocent person is not acceptable. And to avoid that, you really want to give as many roads to appeal as possible. And then that ends up being extremely costly and expensive. So I just have a kind of pragmatic opposition to the death penalty at the end of the day.

中文：对我来说非常简单。 扎克，我就从你开始吧。 我错了吗？ 我不这么认为。 不，我的意思是，政府通常真正擅长的少数事情之一就是杀人。 所以令人惊讶的是，即使是这样，这里也搞砸了。 意外地，他们可以成功杀人，但故意地，为了合法的国家目的，他们不能。 但是，是的，我的意思是，我想这是一种通过让注射死刑看起来很临床来净化正在发生的事情的愿望，尽管我看到了死刑信息中心分享的一张图表，它实际上是最有可能的。 要搞砸，行刑队的可能性最小，其次是触电。 但这些方法让我们更加残酷、更加本能地面对正在发生的事情。 说实话，罗比，我确实反对死刑。 这并不是因为我对处决杀人犯有严重的道德疑虑。 我只是认为......实际上，就像当你谋杀某人时一样，我认为当你越过那条线时，你实际上放弃了你的权利。 但我认为国家，仅仅一个国家处决无辜者的可能性是不可接受的。 为了避免这种情况，你真的想提供尽可能多的上诉途径。 然后这最终会变得极其昂贵。 所以我最终只是对死刑抱有一种务实的反对态度。

Go ahead. Not that I particularly feel any sort of emotional sorry for her, but I do think it's horrible. It's inhumane to effectively mean that somebody is in this limbo period. And the question I was asking is why can't they just give her another dose? Why did they get the dose so incorrect? What was actually going on? And it seems as though that there is a So, let's get started. Liz Wolfe, Reem Ibrahim, and Zach Weissmueller. Sure. Sounds good to me. I fully concur with Zachary and his excellent unimpeachable reasoning here. I think there are practical and moral reasons to oppose the state executing its own citizens. And as a consistent life ethic person, I just, I can't, I can't abide. The dude does not abide.

中文：去吧。我并不是特别对她感到任何情绪上的遗憾，但我确实认为这很可怕。实际上意味着让某人处于这种闪烁不定的状态是不人道的。我问的问题是，为什么他们不能给她再打一剂？为什么他们把剂量弄得这么不对？到底发生了什么？看起来似乎有一个…那么，让我们开始吧。Liz Wolfe、Reem Ibrahim 和 Zach Weissmueller。好的，对我来说听起来没问题。我完全同意 Zachary 及其无可指责的出色推理。我认为反对国家处决自己的公民有实际和道德上的理由。作为一个一贯的生命伦理者，我只是，我不能，我不能容忍。那家伙不能容忍。

Yeah, I used to feel more strongly against it because of the dangers of executing. You can't make it right to someone you've killed. Certainly we've imprisoned people wrongly. You can release them later and give them compensation. I guess you have to compensate the family. You can't make it whole to that person. I mean, this is not necessarily a good thing, but with the ubiquity of cameras everywhere, I think the likelihood of wrongly convicting someone of a capital offense is probably going down over time. And so my concern here is being mitigated a little. I think I would still reserve it for some case where it's just utterly… It's impossible that it's not that person, or like a crime of sort of shocking public, like the Boston Bombers are, I think, a good example. One of them survived, and if they execute that person, I have no doubt that he is guilty of that crime, and it would be fine by me, but it would not be fine by me if they used... A combination of ineffective drugs that left him in some catatonic state that just seems like it's not it's crass to say, but it's not difficult to use the means to end a life like in any other way.

中文：是的，我曾经更强烈地反对它，因为执行的危险。 你无法为你所杀的人伸张正义。 当然，我们错误地监禁了人们。 你可以稍后释放他们并给予他们补偿。 看来你得补偿一下家人了。 你无法让那个人完整。 我的意思是，这不一定是一件好事，但随着摄像头无处不在，我认为错误地判处某人死刑的可能性可能会随着时间的推移而下降。 所以我的担忧有所减轻。 我想我仍然会把它保留在某些情况下，它完全是……不可能不是那个人，或者像一种令人震惊的公众犯罪，我认为波士顿轰炸机就是一个很好的例子。 其中一个活下来了，如果他们处决了那个人，我毫不怀疑他犯了那桩罪行，对我来说没什么问题，但如果他们使用……一种无效的药物组合，让他处于某种紧张状态，说起来似乎不粗鲁，但用这种手段结束生命并不困难，就像用其他方式一样。

Well, I think the theory and the practical is very different, because in theory, like horrific rapists and murderers, I don't want them to live another day, right? That's the sort of theory. But I mean, I take a similar stance to Liz. I think that morally, the state ending life and playing God in that respect, I don't like. And I also don't like the practical aspect of this. The government does lots of things terribly. And my God, ending life is something that needs to take... An enormous amount of consideration, enormous amount of sort of question about what the facts actually look like and how this can happen. And clearly this is one example, one further millionth example of the government getting things wrong.

中文：嗯，我认为理论上和实际操作上是非常不同的，因为在理论上，比如那些可怕的强奸犯和杀人犯，我不希望他们再活一天，对吧？那种就是理论上的想法。但我的意思是，我持有类似于莉兹的立场。我认为在道德上，政府结束生命并扮演上帝的角色，我不喜欢。我也不喜欢这件事情的实际操作。政府做很多事情做得很糟糕。天哪，结束生命是需要——需要大量考虑，需要对事实究竟是什么样子进行大量质疑的一件事，而且怎么可能发生。显然，这是政府出错的又一个例子，再微不足道也好，也是例子之一。

Hey, Reason Roundtable listeners. If you like documentary film, if you like freedom, and if you like Reason, I have some big news for you, especially if you are in New York. In October, Reason is going to premiere a feature documentary at the IFC Theater on West 3rd Street in Manhattan. This documentary is produced entirely by my colleagues here at Reason, and it's called Escaping Venezuela. The film is about how the most oil-rich country in the world, a constitutional democracy... Welcome to OpenAI, where we talk abou Given the growing popularity of that ideology in the United States today, this is a timely and relevant message. The film's going to be shown on October 13th at IFC on West 3rd Street in New York. Go to Reason.org slash events for tickets and more information. That's Reason.org slash events.

中文：嘿，Reason Roundtable 的听众们。如果你喜欢纪录片，如果你喜欢自由，如果你喜欢 Reason，我有一个大消息要告诉你，尤其是如果你在纽约的话。今年十月，Reason 将在曼哈顿西三街的 IFC 剧院首映一部故事片纪录片。这部纪录片完全由我在 Reason 的同事们制作，名为《逃离委内瑞拉》。这部影片讲述了世界上最富石油的国家，一个宪政民主国家……欢迎来到 OpenAI，我们在这里谈论鉴于这种意识形态在美国越来越受欢迎，这是一条及时且相关的信息。这部影片将于 10 月 13 日在纽约西三街的 IFC 影院上映。请访问 Reason.org/events 获取票务和更多信息。网址是 Reason.org/events。

All right, let's move on. All four of us are interested in AI as a topic. It's a big one these days. Sam Altman said recently that the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefit of AI. And he is kind of being positioned as the slightly less in favor of regulation person in the AI tech world. Battles versus Anthropic, which has been more or has very much signaled, not just its ex-coders who keep coming out and saying, you know, all of humanity will go extinct if we keep at this, but kind of echoing those fears. So that's why it's notable that Altman would say, OK, but like some bad things could happen and this could still very much be worth doing, which is probably not a good thing. PR move, but I think tech people are not being very responsible hype figures for their product, even though that is a correct observation, right, that technological advances will have some consequences that are negative.

中文：好吧，我们继续。我们四个人都对人工智能这个话题感兴趣。这在今天是一个很热门的话题。Sam Altman 最近说过，为了人工智能的利益，世界应该接受一些坏事的发生。而他在人工智能技术界被定位为比较不赞成严格监管的人。与 Anthropic 的争论也很明显，它不仅仅是前工程师们不断出来说，如果我们继续这样下去全人类都会灭亡，而且也在呼应这些担忧。所以这就是为什么 Altman 会说，“好了，可能会发生一些坏事，但这仍然可能非常值得去做”是值得注意的，这可能并不是一个好的公关动作。但我认为技术人士作为产品的宣传人物，并没有表现出非常负责任的态度，尽管这是一个正确的观察，对吧，技术进步确实会带来一些负面的后果。

I mean, I'm sure the printing press did as well, but we were not going to...

中文：我的意思是，我确定印刷机也是如此，但我们并不打算……

Yeah, 50,000.

中文：是的，五万。

Yeah, it's enormous. But we as a society have decided that the benefits of the car, the technological advancements, the fact that we can travel more quickly, those benefits have outweighed the potential risks. And I think that that is the right approach when it comes to AI. Absolutely, there will be risks to AI. And we don't know what those risks could look like. But the immense positive outcomes that we can see, I mean, the sort of ability that AI has already proven to be the case, especially, and I really think there's a point that isn't made enough, the medical advancements. Before we even know what we're trying to regulate against, we end up causing more harm than good. And I do think that we need to make that point far more. The medical advancements that we've already seen, the fact that we can screen for diseases way earlier than we ever have, we can sort of look at the DNA and proteins and we can create new drug developments. We've discovered new antibiotics through AI. This is incredible. And I think that what Sam Altman was getting at is, yes, there are risks, but the benefits far outweigh those risks.

中文：是的，这是巨大的。 但我们作为一个社会已经决定，汽车的好处、技术进步、我们可以更快地出行这一事实，这些好处已经超过了潜在的风险。 我认为这对于人工智能来说是正确的方法。 当然，人工智能也会有风险。 我们不知道这些风险会是什么样子。 但我们可以看到巨大的积极成果，我的意思是，人工智能已经证明了这种能力，特别是，我真的认为有一点做得还不够，即医学进步。 在我们还不知道我们要监管什么之前，我们最终造成的弊大于利。 我确实认为我们需要进一步强调这一点。 我们已经看到了医学的进步，我们可以比以往更早地筛查疾病，我们可以观察 DNA 和蛋白质，我们可以开发新的药物。 我们通过人工智能发现了新的抗生素。 这太不可思议了。 我认为萨姆·奥尔特曼的意思是，是的，存在风险，但好处远远大于这些风险。

Yeah, I mean, Milton Friedman pointed out that that's those costs that the costs of the lives not saved and so forth by whatever the technological breakthroughs are. You know, I don't, the government never is able to stop this stuff altogether, but just the delays, you could make a tally of what it costs, but that tally never seems to come around. So that's the danger of a sort of precautionary approach to tech regulation, which I think is worth everyone, not just libertarians, taking seriously. Yeah. All that being said, I don't think it is just a PR thing. You know, disruption is one thing, you know, economic tumult, the creative destruction, so forth. But then what the people at Anthropic in particular seem to be worried about is existential risk. And I do find those concerns a little harder to dismiss than the usual anti-tech progressive response to things. And... I mean, the reason for that is that we've already seen AI agents escape the lab, a lab leak as it were, and then kind of show up in surprising corners of the internet, like on random German wiki pages. So, like, if any of these companies are... If their leadership is actually feeling on edge because they're losing control or have bad cybersecurity, they should be nervous and they should be held fully liable for anything that happens. And that's the prospect. That Trump's AI czar, David Sachs, raised, he's like, we're not going to do regulation, but we are going to keep you on the hook for liability. And I actually think that explains the desire to become a highly regulated or even quasi-public agency. I think they're scared.

中文：是的，我的意思是，米尔顿·弗里德曼（Milton Friedman）指出，无论技术突破是什么，这些成本都是没有挽救生命的成本等等。 你知道，我不知道，政府永远无法完全阻止这些事情，但只是延误，你可以算出它的成本，但这个数字似乎永远不会出现。 因此，这就是对技术监管采取预防性措施的危险，我认为这值得每个人（而不仅仅是自由主义者）认真对待。 是的。 话虽如此，我认为这不仅仅是公关问题。 你知道，破坏是一回事，你知道，经济动荡、创造性破坏等等。 但 Anthropic 的人们似乎特别担心的是存在风险。 我确实发现这些担忧比通常的反科技进步反应更难消除。 而且……我的意思是，原因是我们已经看到人工智能代理逃离了实验室，就像实验室泄漏一样，然后出现在互联网的令人惊讶的角落，比如随机的德国维基页面。 因此，如果这些公司中的任何一家……如果他们的领导层实际上因为失去控制或网络安全状况不佳而感到紧张，他们应该感到紧张，并且应该对发生的任何事情承担全部责任。 这就是前景。 特朗普的人工智能沙皇戴维·萨克斯（David Sachs）提出，他说，我们不会进行监管，但我们会让你承担责任。 我实际上认为这解释了成为高度监管甚至准公共机构的愿望。 我想他们很害怕。

40:00 - 50:00

So many interesting things you said there. I want to return to the liability point, but can I press you a little bit harder on the kind of escaping containment stories we've heard of these models? You know, Hugging Face is one that's been presented to us. You know more about this than I do. My understanding from looking a little bit closer, but probably not as closely as you, at Hugging Face is there was a little bit of a mismatch in the way it was presented. Explained to the public versus what actually happened. It's been explained as this, right, catastrophic, you know, designed this system in a lab and it of its own volition and accords was able to escape confinement. Whereas reality is not quite so dramatic and is, I mean, this was an experiment to see if it would do just that. They did not hamstring it effectively enough to prevent it from having the means to break out. It's somewhere in the middle is my reading, but you might tell me that's not correct.

中文：你刚才说了很多有趣的事情。我想回到责任问题上，但我可以更仔细地问你一些关于我们听说的这些模型逃脱控制的故事吗？你知道，Hugging Face 是一个已经向我们展示的例子。你比我更了解这方面。我从稍微仔细一点（但可能没有你那么仔细）地看 Hugging Face 得出的理解是，它在向公众展示和解释的方式与实际发生的情况之间存在一些不匹配。它被解释成这样，对吧，灾难性的，你知道，在实验室里设计了这个系统，它能够自主地脱离限制。但实际上并没有那么戏剧化，我的意思是，这是一个实验，目的是看看它是否真的会这样做。他们并没有有效地限制它，以防止它有能力突破。我看的情况是介于两者之间，但你可能会告诉我这不正确。

Yeah, I mean, there's been a number of other incidents that I think have been overly hyped. And Brian Chow is someone who has written about these, how there's been one particular kind of testing, a third party tester that basically told the AIs like, Whether that is something intrinsic to the technology or it's something that just speaks to very poor cybersecurity, it's something I think the labs need to take very seriously nonetheless. And I think they are. They're spooked by it.

中文：是的，我的意思是，我认为还有一些其他事件被过度炒作了。布赖恩·周（Brian Chow）写过关于这些事件的文章，他谈到过有一种特定类型的测试——第三方测试员基本上告诉了人工智能一些事情。不论这是技术本身的固有问题，还是仅仅反映出非常糟糕的网络安全，我认为实验室仍然需要非常认真对待。我觉得他们确实在重视，他们对此感到害怕。

But Hugging Face also hasn't been the only incident of its kind, right? Like, that was a situation where there was sort of this intention of, like, break the test, figure out the answers. But there have been other cases, like the swarm of rogue OpenAI agents who attacked a German website over the spring and basically were, like, colluding to share answers, researching their environment, trying to bypass the sandbox restrictions that had been placed on them, and acting very explicitly against developer intentions. You know, not a big deal because guess what? A German website, not such a problem. I could think of adversaries, though, where that could be a problem. And whether it's deliberate espionage that these types of rogue agents could be deployed to do or something that's interpreted as espionage, I do think... It would be wrong to downplay the risks here. There are real and substantial risks related to these rogue agents acting against developer intentions, and we're seeing more and more of that. I do also just think in general, we commit a sort of intellectual fallacy in either direction, right? Where we are dismissive of new technologies because we're so afraid of how they're going to change our existing world and economy. But also we commit a similar fallacy when we act as if every new technology necessarily is just going to have the exact same patterns as old technologies, right? Like, I think that my sense is that... Like, possible AGI and even the level of intelligence that we currently have with AI agents is meaningfully different than other technologies. This is like internet on steroids is how I've heard it described. I think that's very interesting. And I do think that this question of like, you know, in AI circles, you hear it talked about as PDoom, right? Like probability of doom. And it's basically people in the AI safety community talking about the likelihood and trying to predict the likelihood that like, AI will result in some sort of existential catastrophe, whether that's at a massive scale or there's ways to think about this on a smaller scale. One thing I keep thinking about is... You know, digital infrastructure and sort of cybersecurity is in a pretty sorry state right now. And so what happens if there's rogue models or even directed models that attack a power grid and send a power grid shutting down? Like, hopefully we can repair that and reverse that quickly. Or say it's a hospital system, so you can no longer keep track of how you've been treating patients. Or who's on dialysis or who's on ECMO or whatever. Like these are some very, very severe problems that are presented. And I would not be shocked. I think sometimes the P-Doom people who are like shut it all down, the Eliezer Yudkowskis of the world are a little bit ridiculous. It's a little bit doomsday cult. That being said, I do think it's very possible that there's some sort of like mass casualty event that results from some sort of either deliberate or not so deliberate attack that results in a little bit of this awakening as to the capabilities of these models.

中文：但抱脸事件并不是唯一的此类事件，对吧？ 就像，在这种情况下，有某种意图，比如，打破测试，找出答案。 但也有其他案例，比如今年春天，一群流氓 OpenAI 代理攻击了一个德国网站，基本上是串通分享答案、研究他们的环境、试图绕过对他们施加的沙箱限制，以及非常明确地违背开发者意图。 你知道，没什么大不了的，因为你猜怎么着？ 一个德国网站，没有这样的问题。 不过，我可以想到对手，这可能会成为问题。 无论是部署这些类型的流氓特工来进行蓄意的间谍活动，还是被解释为间谍活动的事情，我确实认为......淡化这里的风险是错误的。 这些违背开发商意图的流氓代理存在真实且重大的风险，而且我们看到越来越多的风险。 我也确实认为，总的来说，我们在任一方向都犯了某种智力谬误，对吗？ 我们对新技术不屑一顾，因为我们非常害怕它们将如何改变我们现有的世界和经济。 但当我们表现得好像每项新技术都必然具有与旧技术完全相同的模式时，我们也会犯类似的谬误，对吧？ 就像，我认为我的感觉是......就像，可能的通用人工智能，甚至我们目前人工智能代理的智能水平与其他技术有很大不同。 我听过这样的描述，这就像打了类固醇的互联网一样。 我认为这很有趣。 我确实认为这个问题，你知道，在人工智能圈子里，你听到它被称为 PDoom，对吗？ 就像厄运的概率一样。 基本上，人工智能安全社区的人们正在谈论人工智能将导致某种存在灾难的可能性，并试图预测这种可能性，无论是大规模的还是有办法在较小的范围内思考这一问题。 我一直在思考的一件事是......你知道，数字基础设施和某种网络安全目前处于非常糟糕的状态。 那么，如果存在流氓模型甚至定向模型攻击电网并导致电网关闭，会发生什么呢？ 就像，希望我们能够修复并迅速扭转局面。 或者说这是一个医院系统，因此您无法再跟踪您如何治疗患者。 或者谁在接受透析，谁在接受 ECMO 等等。 像这些是出现的一些非常非常严重的问题。 我不会感到震惊。 我觉得有时候 P-Doom 的人就像把一切都关掉一样，世界上的 Eliezer Yudkowskis 有点可笑。 这有点末日邪教。 话虽这么说，我确实认为很可能存在某种大规模伤亡事件，这些事件是由某种故意或非故意的攻击造成的，导致人们对这些模型的能力有所认识。

Right. My thinking is not that AI presents no risk. I think the casualty or the harm that AI could cause is overwhelmingly, in my view, likely to be just because humans guided it to do that or used it for that purpose, right? Why? Which makes me then think... Um, I, I, like our energy infrastructure being targeted by a hostile power using AI seems more likely to me than the AI itself becoming, I mean, if it's designed in a faulty way to attack and attacks us inadvertently because the people who programmed it, programmed it deficiently, that too, but the idea that some of these like ex-anthropic people or others have that, that Once sufficiently advanced, its desire will be to launch attacks against us is the part where they start losing me. And given a very real risk, in my view, of an AI being designed in a way to harm us on purpose or accidentally by a reckless group of people or foreign power, then I would want to have... Our AI that's like, hey, we tell our AI, hey, AI, we're anticipating attacks on our energy grid by other AIs. How do we guard against that? Please come up with a defensive plan is why then I it ultimately guides me back toward being even more AI than previously.

中文：正确的。 我的想法并不是人工智能不存在风险。 我认为，在我看来，人工智能可能造成的伤亡或伤害绝大多数可能只是因为人类引导它这样做或将其用于该目的，对吗？ 为什么？ 这让我想...嗯，我，我，就像我们的能源基础设施被使用人工智能的敌对力量瞄准的可能性比人工智能本身更大，我的意思是，如果它以错误的方式设计来攻击并无意中攻击我们，因为对其进行编程的人，对它的编程也有缺陷，但是其中一些人（例如前人类或其他人）的想法是，一旦足够先进，它的愿望将是对我们发起攻击，这是他们开始失去的部分 我。 在我看来，考虑到人工智能的设计方式存在非常现实的风险，即一群鲁莽的人或外国势力有意或无意地伤害我们，那么我希望……我们的人工智能就像，嘿，我们告诉我们的人工智能，嘿，人工智能，我们预计其他人工智能将对我们的能源网格进行攻击。 我们该如何防范呢？ 请制定一个防御计划，这就是为什么我最终会引导我变得比以前更加人工智能。

Alignment is still such a live issue that I think it's sort of hard to forecast out what that's going to look like. And also alignment doesn't necessarily mean the same thing even on any, like we're talking about a bunch of different companies and a bunch of different models. And so there will be variability in terms of how they're programmed and how they're taught. But I don't know. I think... I think libertarians would be wrong to both sell short the benefits, but also sell short the risks. And I at least kind of my greatest fear perhaps is not like I don't think like Eliezer and like the P. Doom type scenarios, but I am worried about what happens if we have extraordinary benefits from this technology, but also extraordinary risks that we actually don't know how to contend with.

中文：对齐仍然是一个非常活跃的问题，我认为预测它将会是什么样子有点困难。而且，即使在任何情况下，对齐也不一定意味着同样的事情，比如我们在谈论许多不同的公司和许多不同的模型。所以在它们的编程方式和学习方式上会有差异。但我不知道。我认为……我认为自由意志主义者在低估其好处和低估其风险上都是错误的。至少我个人最大的担忧也许并不是像 Eliezer 和 P. Doom 那类末日场景，但我确实担心，如果我们从这项技术中获得了非凡的好处，同时也伴随着我们实际上不知道如何应对的巨大风险，会发生什么情况。

I think one mode in which libertarians can be useful here, too, is focusing on the issue of concentration of power. So, you know, you're talking about, Liz, there's a variety of different AIs. And ultimately, I think we want that to continue to be the case. And some of what Not all, but some of the regulatory proposals are pushing things towards consolidation. And ultimately, I think even merging with the state. And I have no doubt that the governments around the world are going to have their own AIs. But I worry about if this catastrophic event that you're predicting could happen happens, that what we get is a crackdown on compute and who gets to have it. And I think that is where a lot of the kind of surveillance dangers lie. I think that's instinctively people are getting nervous about the data centers because that's what they're worried about them being used for on some level. In addition to the normal NIMBY concerns that people have. But I think that, you know, something like a, you know, Second Amendment for compute is something that we're going to want to take seriously at some point.

中文：我认为自由主义者在这里也可以发挥作用的一种模式是关注权力集中问题。 所以，你知道，Liz，你说的是有各种各样不同的人工智能。 最终，我认为我们希望这种情况继续下去。 其中一些监管提案（并非全部）但有一些正在推动整合。 最终，我认为甚至与国家合并。 我毫不怀疑世界各地的政府都会拥有自己的人工智能。 但我担心，如果您预测的这种灾难性事件可能发生，我们将面临对计算以及谁拥有它的打击。 我认为这就是许多监视危险所在。 我认为人们本能地对数据中心感到紧张，因为这就是他们担心数据中心在某种程度上被使用的原因。 除了人们常见的邻避担忧之外。 但我认为，你知道，像计算第二修正案这样的东西是我们在某个时候想要认真对待的。

50:00 - 60:00

Well, just like you said, with liability, right, there is a universe in which that is the correct or more consistent with libertarian principles way to do a kind of de facto regulation is not to have a Congress or a president or whoever say, this is the regulation as it pertains to AI, but wait for some harm to occur. And then you go to court and then you get a ruling. And that's how, you know, if one follows the principles. The companies won't like it for exactly the reason you said. They just want to know, you know, clear rules of the road. You hear that all the time. And maybe that's right, or maybe that is a regulatory capture sort of way to guard against liability, which would be in the clear interest of the public.

中文：嗯，就像你说的，关于责任，对吧，有一种情况是，这种做法在某种程度上符合自由主义原则，也就是事实上的监管方式不是通过国会、总统或其他人来制定有关人工智能的规章，而是等待某种伤害发生，然后诉诸法院，然后得到判决。如果按照原则来做，公司们就不会喜欢正如你所说的那样。他们只是想知道明确的规则，你常常会听到这种说法。也许这是对的，或者也许这是一种监管俘获的方式，用来规避责任，这实际上符合公众的切身利益。

I think it's really hard to not at least look at regulatory capture as a potential cause for why some of these tech CEOs are arguing for more regulation. It's almost as though these are the companies, the CEO of Anthropic, these are companies that have already got an enormous market share. They are already entrenched as the big players in AI, at least right now as we are speaking. And so it makes complete sense that, you know, that the incentives are completely there. Yes, they might also be like virtue signaling and saying, don't worry, we're the good guys. We're the guys that are really responsible with our technological advancements and our innovation. We are the good guys. And also at the same time signaling that actually, if there were more regulations on AI, that would benefit. That would benefit OpenAI because they are already the entrenched big players. I'm not saying that is all that is happening. I think that that would be reductive. And I'm sure that there are many people in these sort of technology companies that genuinely are concerned by the risks that Liz just outlined. But I do think that we have to at least consider that regulatory capture may be part of this picture.

中文：我认为，很难不将监管捕获视为一些科技首席执行官主张加强监管的潜在原因。 就好像这些公司，Anthropic 的首席执行官，这些公司已经获得了巨大的市场份额。 他们已经成为人工智能领域的重要参与者，至少在我们现在说话的时候是这样。 因此，你知道，激励措施完全存在，这是完全有道理的。 是的，他们也可能像美德一样发出信号并说，别担心，我们是好人。 我们是真正对我们的技术进步和创新负责的人。 我们是好人。 同时也表明，实际上，如果对人工智能有更多的监管，那将会受益。 这将使 OpenAI 受益，因为他们已经是根深蒂固的大玩家了。 我并不是说这就是正在发生的一切。 我认为这会有所减少。 我确信这类科技公司中有很多人真正担心莉兹刚才概述的风险。 但我确实认为我们至少必须考虑监管捕获可能是这幅图景的一部分。

Yeah. It's interesting that as this issue has become so big, Trump is the president now, and he is, I think, at his most, maybe libertarian is the wrong word, free market or traditionally Republican free market, Milton Friedman oriented on this specific issue, and very much not others. We wish there were other issues like trade and et cetera, where he was also just a sounding board for like,

中文：是的。有趣的是，随着这个问题变得如此重大，特朗普现在是总统，而我认为他在这一具体问题上可能处于最自由市场的状态，也许说自由意志主义不是最准确的词，更确切地说是传统共和党自由市场，米尔顿·弗里德曼式的倾向，而在其他问题上则完全不是。我们希望在贸易等等其他问题上，他也能只是一个类似的意见反馈者。

I think it's because he's fundamentally an optimist. I mean, sometimes to a fault, he kind of falls into like magical thinking of it's only going to work out if I just believe it is going to work out. But I think he has like just an instinctive reaction against the Doomer mindset, and that's like coming through in AI policy to some degree. And also, I think it's because he's fundamentally an optimist. I think he sees the enormous economic potential that may be the only way to dig ourselves out of this fiscal hole that we find ourselves in.

中文：我认为这是因为他本质上是一个乐观主义者。我的意思是，有时候他甚至有些过于乐观，他有点陷入那种魔法思维：只有我相信它会成功，它才会成功。但我认为他对末世论心态有一种本能的反应，这在某种程度上也体现在人工智能政策上。而且，我认为这是因为他本质上是一个乐观主义者。我觉得他看到了巨大的经济潜力，这可能是我们摆脱目前财政困境的唯一方法。

Maybe. All right. Let's turn to our cultural recommendations and we'll wrap up. Reem, why don't you get us started?

中文：也许吧。好吧。让我们来看看我们的文化推荐，然后我们就结束吧。Reem，你来带头吧？

Yes, so over the weekend, I've recently begun watching the 1995 version of Pride and Prejudice. And it's the TV series. It's a six-episode series. And I think that the reason why I enjoyed it so much is that it sort of felt as though the characters... I think what's interesting is the characters themselves, especially those women, feel so independent of the societal expectations. And Elizabeth Banner herself sort of refused to marry up in terms of her class status, purely because, for this particular reason, she was saying that I want to marry for what I want in my life, and I want to be able to enjoy my life. And I think that That particular independentness and sort of in this particular 1995 series is sort of so brilliantly depicted and I just really, really enjoyed it. It's only six episodes. It was it came out before I was born, but I recently started watching it and I think it's pretty good.

中文：是的，所以在周末，我最近开始看 1995 年版的《傲慢与偏见》。这是电视剧版，一共有六集。我觉得我之所以如此喜欢它，是因为感觉那些角色……我认为有趣的是角色本身，特别是那些女性，感觉非常独立于社会的期望。而伊丽莎白·班纳特本人也拒绝按她的社会阶层去结婚，仅仅因为，她在说，我想按照自己的意愿去结婚，我想享受我的生活。我觉得这种特别的独立性，在这部 1995 年的电视剧中表现得非常出色，我真的非常喜欢。这部剧只有六集，它是在我出生之前播出的，但我最近开始看，我觉得相当不错。

Reem, I'm going to tell you what you actually liked about it, even though you may not have noticed. The sex. No, what you liked about it, that it was brightly lit and colorful, and you could hear everything they were saying in it. Unlike all movies and TVs now, for some reason that escapes me.

中文：Reem，我要告诉你你实际上喜欢它的什么，虽然你可能没有注意到。性。不，你喜欢它的，是它明亮多彩，而且你能听到他们说的每一句话。与现在所有的电影和电视不同，出于某种我无法理解的原因。

You are right. Everything is so much more dark and tinted.

中文：你是对的。一切都显得更加阴暗和有色滤镜。

Oh, it's awful. Awful. Liz?

中文：哦，太糟了。糟透了。莉兹？

I like how the Bennett sisters would never find themselves in a frat house doing cocaine. Very independent girls. I deeply enjoy them as well. I've got to recommend something a little sexy, I suppose, if you're into that kind of thing. Some Kind of Heaven, a documentary about the villages produced by Darren Aronofsky and directed by Lance Oppenheim. My relationship with Zach has now, that we don't do our podcast together, basically devolved into us talking about Darren Aronofsky and Lance Oppenheim. So if you want to be on our level, you should watch all of their work. But this one is absolutely wild. If you're not familiar with The Villages, it's a retirement community in Florida, very explicitly for the Over 55 set. And the film is a documentary. It follows a super sad and lonely widow. There's an 80-something-year-old who lives in his van and basically tries to, I guess it's called parachuting, I don't really know, like sleep with different ladies in lieu of actually finding your own accommodations. But the whole, like everything about the villages, I've never been, but Zachary has been. It's all totally like synthetic, like the local media is like, like, it's very Truman Show. Everything is handpicked for this specific community. And a lot of the components of it are just made up. Like there's this whole fake history about the villages. It's not real. I mean, it was a planned development planned in what, the 80s, Zach? Yeah. But they have a whole fake history about like how the little fishing village was started like in the early 1900s, something ridiculous. But I think the thing that's really interesting is like. It kind of shows the secularization of our society and how little there is when you reach the end of life. And to some degree, like, you know, there's this vapidness, there's this consumption theme, there's this rudderlessness, loneliness, and angst. And like, these things aren't exclusively limited to one particular demographic or one particular stage of life. But it's a good reminder that like how you live is kind of how you die. And there's a lot of people who have hoarded their wealth and I think very minimally interrogated their values and what they really want to accomplish. And so by the end, they just have some excess money to burn on fricking Applebee's and pickleball. And it strikes me as a somewhat hollow existence, just this sort of pursuit of age appropriate and age inappropriate pleasure. But I don't know, man. Like, is that all there is? It's pretty good.

中文：我喜欢贝内特姐妹永远不会发现自己在兄弟会家里吸食可卡因。 非常独立的女孩。 我也非常喜欢它们。 我想，如果你喜欢那种东西，我必须推荐一些有点性感的东西。 《某种天堂》是一部关于村庄的纪录片，由达伦·阿罗诺夫斯基制作、兰斯·奥本海姆执导。 现在，我和扎克的关系不再一起做播客，基本上变成了我们谈论达伦·阿罗诺夫斯基和兰斯·奥本海姆。 所以如果你想达到我们的水平，你应该观看他们所有的作品。 但这绝对是狂野的。 如果您不熟悉 The Villages，那是佛罗里达州的一个退休社区，专门针对 55 岁以上人群。 这部电影是一部纪录片。 它讲述了一个超级悲伤和孤独的寡妇的故事。 有一个 80 多岁的人住在他的货车里，基本上尝试着，我猜这就是所谓的跳伞，我真的不知道，比如和不同的女士睡，而不是自己寻找住宿。 但总的来说，就像村庄里的一切一样，我从来没有去过，但扎卡里去过。 这一切完全像是合成的，就像当地媒体一样，就像，这非常杜鲁门秀。 一切都是为这个特定社区精心挑选的。 它的很多组件都是刚刚组装好的。 就像关于村庄的整个历史都是假的。 这不是真的。 我的意思是，这是 80 年代计划的开发计划，扎克？ 是的。 但他们有一整套虚假的历史，比如这个小渔村是如何在 1900 年代初开始建立的，这很荒谬。 但我认为真正有趣的是。 这在某种程度上表明了我们社会的世俗化，以及当你到达生命的尽头时，你所拥有的东西是多么的少。 在某种程度上，你知道，会有这种空洞感，这种消费主题，这种无方向感、孤独感和焦虑感。并且，这些现象并不仅仅局限于某一个特定的人群或生活阶段。但这提醒人们，你怎么生活，很大程度上也决定你怎么死。有很多人囤积了财富，却很少质问自己的价值观和真正想要实现的目标。所以到最后，他们只是有一些多余的钱去挥霍在苹果餐厅和匹克球上。在我看来，这是一种有些空虚的存在，只是追求年龄适宜或不适宜的快乐。但我不知道，伙计，这就是全部吗？还不错。

One uplifting episode of this podcast. Zach!

中文：这档播客中的一个振奋人心的片段。扎克！

There's a little bit about sperm, so you should also check that one out.

中文：里面有一点关于精子的内容，所以你也应该看看那个。

Yeah, I watched that one this weekend, Sperm World, that Lance Oppenheimer also made. But yeah, Liz, so when I visited the villages for a feature for Reason Magazine, and one of my exercises was I just asked every single person I encountered if they had seen some kind of heaven, and they all kind of like denied, like some of them were like, yeah, I watched like five minutes of it, but I could tell that they watched it. But anyway, so... Hold on, did they seem weird? Did they seem like well-adjusted or no? No. I met some very nice people there, and the story ultimately is a lot about land use and privatization and the villages as a model of how to actually build housing. But anyway, so my cultural recommendation is a cultural recommendation that Liz Wolfe made to me, so you can credit her for this one as well. It's a book called Strange Rites, New Religion in a Godless World by Tara Isabella Burton. And it's a reminder to us all that when traditional religion declines, something always seems to fill the vacuum. In our age, it turns out to be break into a few camps, New Age philosophy centered around the self, self-care, the ego, very goop. And it just very astutely lays out these major competing worldviews or pseudo-religions, whatever you want to call them, that are competing for mind space in the digital age and makes a strong case that the future will largely be shaped by whichever one gains an advantage or prevails. And my personal takeaway is that the human condition is to be kind of pulled between some of these opposing forces. Cold rationalism, unmoored spiritual dabbling, and that finding the balance between those is the way to avoid madness individually and culturally. So hopefully we can get there.

中文：是的，我这个周末看了一部《精子世界》，也是兰斯·奥本海默制作的。 但是，是的，莉兹，所以当我为《理性》杂志的专题访问村庄时，我的练习之一就是问我遇到的每一个人是否见过某种天堂，他们都有点否认，就像他们中的一些人说，是的，我看了大约五分钟，但我可以看出他们看了。 但无论如何，所以……等等，他们看起来很奇怪吗？ 他们看起来是否适应得很好？ 不。我在那里遇到了一些非常好的人，故事最终主要是关于土地使用和私有化，以及作为如何实际建造住房的模型的村庄。 但无论如何，我的文化推荐是莉兹·沃尔夫向我提出的文化推荐，所以你也可以将这一点归功于她。 这是一本名为《奇怪的仪式，无神世界中的新宗教》的书，作者是塔拉·伊莎贝拉·伯顿。 这提醒我们所有人，当传统宗教衰落时，似乎总会有某种东西来填补真空。 在我们这个时代，它被分成了几个阵营，新时代哲学以自我、自我关怀、自我为中心，非常愚蠢。 它非常敏锐地阐述了这些主要的相互竞争的世界观或伪宗教，无论你想怎么称呼它们，它们在数字时代争夺思维空间，并有力地证明，未来将在很大程度上由获得优势或占上风的一方决定。 我个人的看法是，人类的状况是在这些对立力量之间拉扯的。 冷酷的理性主义、无拘无束的精神涉足，以及在这些之间找到平衡是避免个人和文化疯狂的方法。 所以希望我们能到达那里。

60:00 - 70:00

Madness. Avoid it. My cultural recommendation is The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time, the original for the Nintendo 64, which came out, I don't know, 29 million years ago. I'm replaying it now because a new one is coming out. If you're at all keeping up with video game news, this is going to be a huge on Which I love to death. It is so weird looking, these little polygons, the graphics are just horrible and contribute to a sense of surrealism and like uncanny valley because everyone looks so disturbing. They look worse than if it had just been 2D graphics and then much worse than anything that came out on the GameCube a few years later. But the game is great. The theme of it is becoming an adult. You start as kid Link, and you do really simplistic fantasy adventures like the talking tree is sick, or the giant fish swallowed the princess, or whatever. And then you age seven years, and you're cast into this nightmarish hellscape of like... Hands fall down from the sky and grab you, and there's like undead creatures everywhere, and it's like, the difficulty curve of the game is significant. A lot of people didn't even finish the game because the water temple, the third dungeon when you're an adult, is like so, so hard to complete if you've never done it before or you don't have a guide. Anyway, I'm enjoying it to death. I highly recommend it. And I can't wait for the remake, which I am very worried will ruin it for me and do something bad. But so far, I've seen no sign that I'm going to dislike it. I like the way it looks. And I'm cautiously, cautiously, cautiously optimistic that it will not succumb to, you know, the gray, you can't see anything on your screen phenomenon that is consuming all media and that I'm very upset about. All right, thank you all for watching this week's edition of the Reason Roundtable with all of us. Your regularly scheduled hosts will be releasing a bonus episode later in the week, and they'll be back, of course, next week. But we might be back, too, at some point in the future. Who knows what it holds? Bye-bye for now.

中文：疯狂。 避免它。 我的文化推荐是《塞尔达传说时之笛》，它是任天堂 64 的原作，我不知道它是在 2900 万年前问世的。 我现在正在重播它，因为新的即将发布。 如果你一直在关注电子游戏新闻，这将是我爱死的一个大新闻。 它看起来很奇怪，这些小多边形，图形太可怕了，给人一种超现实主义的感觉，就像恐怖谷一样，因为每个人看起来都很令人不安。 它们看起来比 2D 图形还要糟糕，而且比几年后 GameCube 上出现的任何东西都要糟糕得多。 但游戏很棒。 它的主题是成为一个成年人。 你从小林克开始，你会经历一些非常简单的奇幻冒险，比如会说话的树生病了，或者大鱼吞下了公主，或者其他什么。 然后你七岁了，你被扔进了这个噩梦般的地狱，就像……手从天上掉下来抓住你，到处都是不死生物，就像，游戏的难度曲线是显着的。 很多人甚至没有完成游戏，因为水之神庙是成年人的第三个地下城，如果你以前从未做过或者没有指导，那么很难完成。 无论如何，我已经享受得要死了。 我强烈推荐它。 我已经等不及重拍了，我非常担心这会毁掉我的作品并做一些坏事。 但到目前为止，我还没有看到任何迹象表明我会不喜欢它。 我喜欢它的样子。 我谨慎、谨慎、谨慎乐观地认为，它不会屈服于灰色，你在屏幕上看不到任何东西，这种现象正在消耗所有媒体，我对此感到非常不安。 好的，感谢大家收看本周的《Reason 圆桌讨论》，由我们所有人共同主持。你们平时的主持人将在本周晚些时候发布一集特别节目，他们当然会在下周回归。但我们未来也可能会回来。谁知道会发生什么呢？暂时先再见。