蓋茨: 先進科學技術不能拯救世界(1)

Computers are not going to save the world, says Bill Gates, whatever Mark Zuckerberg and the rest of Silicon Valley might believe. The power of the internet will do nothing for the world's poorest - but eradicating disease just might.

比爾•蓋茨(Bill Gates)說，電腦拯救不了世界——不管馬克•扎克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)以及硅谷其他人怎麼看。互聯網的威力根本幫不了全球最貧窮的人羣，倒是根除某些疾病有望造福於窮人。

Bill Gates describes himself as a technocrat. But he does not believe that technology will save the world. Or, to be more precise, he does not believe it can solve a tangle of entrenched and inter-related problems that afflict humanity's most vulnerable: the spread of diseases in the developing world and the poverty, lack of opportunity and despair they engender. “I certainly love the IT thing,” he says. “But when we want to improve lives, you've got to deal with more basic things like child survival, child nutrition.”

蓋茨自稱是技術統治論者（technocrat）。但他不相信技術能夠拯救世界。或者更準確地說，他不相信技術能解決發展中國家根深蒂固且相互關聯的問題：疾病、貧困，機會匱乏和由此帶來的絕望。“我當然喜歡IT的玩意兒，”他說，“但當我們要改善人們的生活時，你得處理一些更爲基本的事情，如兒童的生存和營養。”

These days, it seems that every West Coast billionaire has a vision for how technology can make the world a better place. A central part of this new consensus is that the internet is an inevitable force for social and economic improvement; that connectivity is a social good in itself. It was a view that recently led Mark Zuckerberg to outline a plan for getting the world's unconnected 5 billion people online, an effort the Facebook boss called “one of the greatest challenges of our generation”. But asked whether giving the planet an internet connection is more important than finding a vaccination for malaria, the co-founder of Microsoft and world's second-richest man does not hide his ­irritation: “As a priority? It's a joke.”

如今，對於技術如何能讓世界變得更美好，似乎美國西海岸的每一位億萬富翁都有着同一個願景。這種新共識的核心內容是，互聯網是一股推動社會和經濟改善的不可迴避的力量；網絡互連本身就是一種社會公益。正是這種觀點促使扎克伯格最近制定了一項旨在幫助全球民衆都能上網的計劃。目前在全球範圍內還有50億人未能連接網絡。這位Facebook的老闆稱，此舉是“我們這代人面臨的最大挑戰之一”。但在被問及讓全球人都能上網是否比找到瘧疾疫苗更重要時，微軟(Microsoft)聯合創始人、世界第二富豪蓋茨絲毫不掩飾自己的憤怒：“優先普及互聯網？這簡直是開玩笑。”

Then, slipping back into the sarcasm that often breaks through when he is at his most engaged, he adds: “Take this malaria ­vaccine, [this] weird thing that I'm thinking of. Hmm, which is more important, connectivity or malaria vaccine? If you think connectivity is the key thing, that's great. I don't.”

接着，蓋茨的語氣又回到了他在辯得最起勁時常常流露出的那種嘲諷上，他說：“就拿這種瘧疾疫苗（這個）我正在琢磨的古怪玩意來說吧。嗯，哪一個更重要，網絡連通性還是瘧疾疫苗？如果你認爲網絡連接是重要，那很好。但我可不這麼認爲。”

At 58, Bill Gates has lost none of the impatience or intellectual passion he was known for in his youth. Sitting in his office on the shore of Seattle's Lake Washington, the man who dropped out of Harvard University nearly four decades ago and went on to build the world's first software fortune is more relaxed than he was. He has a better haircut and the more ­pronounced air of self-deprecation that comes with being married and having children who have reached adolescence. But, with the relentless intellectual energy he has always brought to bear on whatever issue is before him, he still can't resist the jibes at ideas he thinks are wrong-headed. After the interview, his minders call to try and persuade me to not report his comments on Zuckerberg: as a senior statesman of the tech and philanthropic worlds, it doesn't help these days to pick fights.

58歲的蓋茨仍舊是年輕時那般缺乏耐心和求知心切。近40年前，他從哈佛大學(Harvard University)輟學，後來締造了全球第一家成功的軟件巨擘。此時此刻，他坐在西雅圖華盛頓湖(Lake Washington)畔的辦公室裏，心態比以前更輕鬆。他的髮型也更爲講究，舉手投足間更明顯地散發出成熟男人（他的孩子已進入青春期）那典型的自嘲氣場。但那始終如一的知識分子的特性，使得他仍忍不住要對那些他認爲荒唐的想法嘲笑一番。本次專訪結束後，他的助手們打電話來，試圖說服我不要報道他對扎克伯格的評論——作爲一名跨越科技界和慈善界的資深政治家，眼下挑起爭論可不是上策。

There is no getting round the fact, however, that Gates often sounds at odds with the new generation of billionaire technocrats. He was the first to imagine that computing could seep into everyday life, with the Microsoft mission to put a PC on every desk and in every home. But while others talk up the world-changing power of the internet, he is under no illusions that it will do much to improve the lives of the world's poorest.

但很難迴避的一個事實是，蓋茨的言論往往與新一代技術統治論的億萬富翁們格格不入。他是第一個想象電腦計算可能滲入日常生活的人，當年微軟的使命就是讓每張辦公桌上和每個家庭裏都有一臺個人電腦(PC)。但當別人津津樂道互聯網擁有改變世界的力量時，他卻不抱任何幻想，認爲互聯網對改善世界窮人的生活不會起到太大幫助。

“Innovation is a good thing. The human condition - put aside bioterrorism and a few footnotes - is improving because of innovation,” he says. But while ­“technology's amazing, it doesn't get down to the people most in need in anything near the timeframe we should want it to”.

他說：“創新是件好事。人類的生存條件正因創新而不斷改善，暫且不提生物恐怖主義和幾個腳註”但是，儘管“科技是神奇的，但它根本不能按照我們設定的時間表卻造福最需要幫助的人們。”

It was an argument he says he made to Thomas Friedman as The New York Times columnist was writing his 2005 book, TheWorld is Flat, a work that came to define the almost end-of-history optimism that accompanied the entry of China and India into the global labour markets, a transition aided by the internet revolution. “Fine, go to those Bangalore Infosys centres, but just for the hell of it go three miles aside and go look at the guy living with no toilet, no running water,” Gates says now. “The world is not flat and PCs are not, in the hierarchy of human needs, in the first five rungs.”

蓋茨說，他曾向紐約時報(New York Times)專欄作家托馬斯•弗裏德曼(Thomas Friedman)提出這個觀點，當時弗裏德曼正在著述《世界是平的》(The World is Flat)。2005年出版的這本書，最終成爲一部突顯歷史彷彿就要終結的樂觀情緒的著作。這種樂觀情緒是伴隨中國和印度進入全球勞動力市場出現的，而這種轉變正是在互聯網革命的幫助下實現的。蓋茨說，“好吧，可以去看看印孚瑟斯(Infosys)在班加羅爾的商業中心，但不妨觀察得到位一點，到距那些中心3英里外的地方去看看那些生活在沒有廁所、沒有自來水環境中的人們。”“世界不是平的，在人類需求階梯上，PC排不到前5位。”

It is perceptions such as this that have led Gates to spend not just his fortune but most of his time on good works. Other ­billionaires may take to philanthropy almost as a mark of their social status but, for Gates, it has the force of a moral imperative. The decision to throw himself into causes like trying to prevent childhood deaths in the developing world or improving ­education in the US was the result of careful ethical calculations, he says.

正是基於這樣的觀念，蓋茨將自己的財富以及大部分時間投入到慈善事業。其他億萬富翁或許幾乎把行善當作自身社會地位的一種標誌，但對蓋茨來說，這是一種道德需要。他表示，自己之所以決定投身於防止發展中國家兒童死亡或提高美國教育水平這樣的事業，是因爲在道德層面經過了仔細的考慮。

Quoting from an argument advanced by hedge fund manager Paul Singer, for instance, he questions why anyone would donate money to build a new wing for a museum rather than spend it on preventing illnesses that can lead to blindness. “The moral equivalent is, we're going to take 1 per cent of the people who visit this [museum] and blind them,” he says. “Are they willing, because it has the new wing, to take that risk? Hmm, maybe this blinding thing is slightly barbaric.”

他援引對衝基金經理保羅•辛格(Paul Singer)曾提出，爲什麼會有人捐錢給某個博物館興建新的側廳，而不是把錢花在預防可能導致失明的疾病上。“從道德層面說，這樣的舉動就等同於我們把1%的博物館參觀者變成盲人。”他說，“就因爲博物館有了新的側廳，他們就願意冒這個風險嗎？嗯，也許這個變成盲人的構想野蠻了一點。”

Through the stroke of pen on chequebook, Gates probably now has the power to affect the lives and wellbeing of a larger number of his fellow humans than any other private individual in history. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which he set up with his wife in 1997 and where he has been working since leaving his full-time role at Microsoft five years ago, gives away nearly $4bn a year. Much of the money goes towards improving health and fighting poverty in developing countries by tackling malaria or paying for vaccination drives against infectious diseases. This is nearly half as much as the US government spent on global health initiatives in 2012.

在漫長的人類歷史中，爲慈善事業大開支票的蓋茨，現在和其他人物相比很可能擁有影響更多人生活與健康的威力。1997年，他與妻子共同設立了“比爾和梅琳達•蓋茨基金會”(Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation)。5年前他從微軟的全職崗位上退下來後，一直致力於該基金會的工作。如今，該基金會每年支出近40億美元。很大一部分資金被用於在發展中國家抗擊瘧疾或資助接種疫苗預防傳染病，以求改善健康狀況、擺脫貧困。這一數字接近2012年美國政府全球健康倡議支出的一半。

In many ways, Gates was the archetype for the successful tech entrepreneur, the driven nerd who created an industry with little more than foresight and drive. But to the generation of aspiring techno-visionaries who have followed, the arc of his career no longer has the allure it once did, even if his iconic status is assured. These include people such as Peter Diamandis, a serial entrepreneur who founded the X Prize, which in 1996 offered a $10m award for the first private sector organisation that could create a suborbital space rocket. He likes to think big, and his latest brainstorm involves trying to mine minerals on passing asteroids.

在許多方面，蓋茨都堪稱成功高科技創業家的典型代表——他是充滿激情的電腦狂，幾乎單憑遠見和鍥而不捨就締造了一個產業。但是，對於一代曾效仿蓋茨的、有抱負的技術夢想家來說，儘管蓋茨的偶像地位仍不可動搖，但他的職業生涯軌跡已經光環褪去，包括連環創業家彼得•迪曼蒂斯(Peter Diamandis)也這樣看待蓋茨，迪曼蒂斯曾創立X Prize，該組織在1996年設立了一項1000萬美元的大獎，擬頒給首家開發出亞軌道太空火箭的私營機構。迪曼蒂斯喜歡宏大的構想，他的最新創意涉及從近地小行星上開採礦物。

According to Diamandis, the Gates Foundation, with its focus on alleviating the suffering of the poorest, smacks of the early20th-century philanthropy of the robber barons - men such as Andrew Carnegie and John D Rockefeller, who built and then milked monopolies before spending their later years doling out cash to worthy causes. The latest wave of techno-visionaries, he says, is focused instead on creating whole new industries capable of changing the world.

迪曼蒂斯認爲，致力於減輕窮苦人羣苦難的蓋茨基金會，有點像20世紀早期“強盜大亨”的那種慈善，像安德魯•卡內基(Andrew Carnegie)和約翰•D•洛克菲勒(John D Rockefeller)等人的作爲，他們建立並利用壟斷企業來發跡，然後在晚年將向崇高的事業大筆揮豪。他說，與之不同，最新一波技術夢想家致力於締造能夠改變世界的全新產業。

At the height of its powers, the way that Microsoft wielded its PC monopoly to maximise profits from the computing industry made it feared and hated by rivals and start-ups alike. Now, with the PC world on the wane and the company's leadership and direction in doubt, it is spoken of almost with disdain in Silicon Valley - even though it remains the third biggest tech company based on stock market value, behind Apple and Google.

實力達到頂峯時的微軟，曾試圖利用其在PC領域的壟斷地位，在計算行業賺取最大化的利潤，這種做法使得競爭對手和初創企業對其又恨又怕。如今，隨着PC產業日漸衰落、微軟的領導地位和發展方向受到質疑，儘管微軟仍是市值僅次於蘋果和谷歌後的第三大的科技公司，硅谷人士在談到微軟時流露出的則是近乎不屑的語氣。

Gates fends off questions about Microsoft, though he says - contrary to persistent speculation - that he is not about to step back in to run it as Steve Jobs once returned to revive Apple. He also admits that the company is taking up a much bigger slice of his time than the one day a week to which he signed up after he left. As chairman and a member of the committee searching for a replacement to Steve Ballmer as chief executive, Gates says he still holds regular meetings with some of the company's product groups and that he expects to spend considerable time working with the next boss after an appointment is made.

蓋茨不願回答有關微軟的問題。不過他說，與一直以來外界的猜測相反，他無意像當年史蒂夫•喬布斯(Steve Jobs)回去重振蘋果那樣再度執掌微軟。他還承認，目前他花在微軟身上的時間遠多於預期水平，他離開時確認的是每週一天。蓋茨仍是微軟董事長，他參與物色接替史蒂夫•鮑爾默(Steve Ballmer)出任首席執行官的人選，他說他仍與公司的某些產品小組定期開會，並預計會在下一任掌門人獲得任命後，投入相當的時間與其合作。

To Diamandis's argument that there is more good to be done in the world by building new industries than by giving away money, meanwhile, he has a brisk retort: “Industries are only valuable to the degree they meet human needs. There's not some - at least in my psyche - this notion of, oh, we need new ­industries. We need children not to die, we need people to have an opportunity to get a good education.”

同時蓋茨還對迪曼蒂斯有關締造新產業比捐錢搞慈善更有益於世界的觀點給出了尖銳的反駁：“一個產業只有能夠滿足人類的需求時，纔是有價值的。不存在，至少在我心中不存在“我們需要新產業”的概念，我們需要的是孩子健康成長、人們有機會接受良好的教育。”