TED演讲

第一篇：TED演讲

TED演讲|激励人心的领导力 西蒙·斯涅克:伟大的领袖如何激励行动

How do you explain when things don't go as we assume? Or better, how do you explain when others are able to achieve things that seem to defy all of the assumptions? For example: Why is Apple so innovative? Year after year, after year, after year, they're more innovative than all their competition.And yet, they're just a computer company.They're just like everyone else.They have the same access to the same talent, the same agencies, the same consultants, the same media.Then why is it that they seem to have something different? Why is it that Martin Luther King led the Civil Rights Movement? He wasn't the only man who suffered in a pre-civil rights America.And he certainly wasn't the only great orator of the day.Why him? And why is it that the Wright brothers were able to figure out control-powered, manned flight when there were certainly other teams who were better qualified, better funded, and they didn't achieve powered man flight, and the Wright brothers beat them to it.There's something else at play here.各位，当事情不是我们料想的那样时，你如何解释？当别人能够成就的事实似乎推翻了过去所有的假设的时候，你如何解释？举个例子，为什么苹果如此具有创新能力？一年又一年，一年又一年，他们比竞争对手更加创新。而且，他们只是一家电脑公司。就像每个电脑公司一样，他们能招到的人才，获得的资源，找到的顾问，采访的媒体都和别人一样。那为什么他们好像总是能够拿出一些不同的东西来？同样，为什么是马丁·路德·金来领导民权运动？他不是唯一遭受运动前社会歧视的黑人，他也肯定不是那个时代唯一伟大的演说家。那为什么是他领导民权运动？还有，为什么是莱特兄弟能够研制出动力控制的载人飞机？当时还有其他团队比他们兄弟俩更有能力，更多资金，他们却没能实现人力飞行，莱特兄弟打败了他们。一定还有一些什么别的因素在起作用。

About three and a half years ago I made a discovery, and this discovery profoundly changed my view on how I thought the world worked.And it even profoundly changed the way in which I operate in it.As it turns out--there's a pattern--as it turns out, all the great and inspiring leaders and organizations in the world, whether it's Apple, or Martin Luther King or the Wright brothers, they all think, act and communicate the exact same way.And it's the complete opposite to everyone else.All I did was codify it.And it's probably the world's simplest idea.I call it the golden circle.大概三年半前，我有了一个发现，这个发现从根本上改变了我对世界是如何运作的看法，甚至也根本改变了我运作的方式。事实显示，有这么一个模式，这个世界上所有伟大的激动人心的领导者和组织，不管它是苹果，或者马丁·路德·金，或者莱特兄弟，他们思考，行动和沟通的方式完全一样！而对其他人，则正好反其道而行之。我所做的就是把它整理出来，这可能是世界上最简单的一个观念。我称之为“黄金圆环”。

（板上画了三个圆环，中心是“为什么why”, 第二个环是“怎么做how”，最外面的环是“是什么what”）

Why? How? What? This little idea explains why some organizations and some leaders are able to inspire where others aren't.Let me define the terms really quickly.Every single person, every single organization on the planet knows what they do, 100 percent.Some know how they do it, whether you call it your differentiated value proposition or your proprietary process or your USP.But very, very few people or organizations know why they do what they do.And by “why” I don't mean “to make a profit.” That's a result.It's always a result.By “why” I mean: what's your purpose? What's your cause? What's your belief? Why does your organization exist? Why do you get out of bed in the morning? And why should anyone care? Well, as a result, the way we think, the way we act, the way we communicate is from the outside in.It's obvious.We go from the clearest thing to the fuzziest thing.But the inspired leaders and the inspired organizations, regardless of their size, regardless of their industry, all think, act and communicate from the inside out.为什么？怎么做？是什么？这个黄金圆环解释了为什么有的组织和领导者能够激发行动，而其他的不能。让我很快地给这些词下个定义。这个地球上每个人，每个组织都知道自己在做什么，百分之百的。其中有的知道他们该怎么做，不管你称作差异价值定位，或是你的独有工艺，或是你的独特卖点都行。但是非常非常少的人和组织才知道他们为什么做手头的事情。这里我说的“为什么“不是什么“赢利”。那只是结果，一直都是结果而已。说“为什么”我的意思是：你的目标目的是什么？你的原因是什么？你的信念是什么？你的机构为什么存在？你每天早上为什么起床？你起不起床对别人有什么不同，别人为什么要在乎？作为结果，我们思考的方式，我们行动的方式，和我们沟通的方式，在这个黄金圆环上都是从外到内的。我们从最清楚的再到最模糊的。但是激励型的领导者和组织，不管他们大小规模，不管他们所在行业，都从内到外地思考，行动，和沟通。

Let me give you an example.I use Apple because they're easy to understand and everybody gets it.If Apple were like everyone else, a marketing message from them might sound like this.”We make great computers.They're beautifully designed, simple to use and user friendly.Want to buy one?“ Neh.And that's how most of us communicate.That's how most marketing is done.That's how most sales are done.And that's how most of us communicate interpersonally.We say what we do, we say how we're different or how we're better and we expect some sort of a behavior, a purchase, a vote, something like that.Here's our new law firm.We have the best lawyers with the biggest clients.We always perform for our clients who do business with us.Here's our new car.It gets great gas mileage.It has leather seats.Buy our car.But it's uninspiring.让我给您举个例子。我用苹果电脑，因为它易于理解，每个人都能上手。如果苹果和其他竞争对手一样，他们的广告语可能就会这样写：“我们制造出色的电脑，它们设计精美，使用简单，界面友好。想要买一台吗？”不想！这就是我们大部分人沟通的方式。这也是大部分公司的市场推广方式。这也是大部分销售完成的方式。我们说我们要做什么，我们是怎样与众不同或者更好，然后我们就等着别人被打动或者掏腰包，投票，诸如此类。比如，你对客户说，这是我们新的律师事务所，我们有最好的律师，最大的客户，我们总是为我们的客户竭尽全力。再比如，这是我们推出的新车型，非常省油，又有皮座垫，快来买我们的车吧──这些都无法激励我们。

Here's how Apple actually communicates.”Everything we do, we believe in challenging the status quo.We believe in thinking differently.The way we challenge the status quo is by making our products beautifully designed, simple to use and user friendly.We just happen to make great computers.Want to buy one?“ Totally different right? You're ready to buy a computer from me.All I did was reverse the order of information.What it proves to us is that people don't buy what you do;people buy why you do it.People don't buy what you do;they buy why you do it.苹果实际上是这样沟通的，“我们所做的每件事情，我们都相信要打破现状，以不同的角度思考。我们打破现状的方式就是让我们的产品设计精美，使用简单，界面友好。我们只是碰巧制造电脑而已。想要买一台吗？”味道完全不同，对吧！你已经准备要向我订购了。我所做的就是反转信息的顺序。事实已经向我们证明，顾客不是购买你所做的产品；顾客购买你制作它的理由。

This explains why every single person in this room is perfectly comfortable buying a computer from Apple.But we're also perfectly comfortable buying an MP3 player from Apple, or a phone from Apple, or a DVR from Apple.But, as I said before, Apple's just a computer company.There's nothing that distinguishes them structurally from any of their competitors.Their competitors are all equally qualified to make all of these products.In fact, they tried.A few years ago, Gateway came out with flat screen TVs.They're eminently qualified to make flat screen TVs.They've been making flat screen monitors for years.Nobody bought one.Dell came out with MP3 players and PDAs.And they make great quality products.And they can make perfectly well-designed products.And nobody bought one.In fact, talking about it now, we can't even imagine buying an MP3 player from Dell.Why would you buy an MP3 player from a computer company? But we do it every day.People don't buy what you do;they buy why you do it.The goal is not to do business with everybody who needs what you have.The goal is to do business with people who believe what you believe.Here's the best part.这就解释了为什么在这个大厅里的每个人都觉得购买苹果电脑挺好的，但是我们也觉得买苹果的MP3播放器(指iPod)挺好的，或者是苹果出品的电话(iPhone)，或者是苹果的数字录像设备(Apple TV)。但是，就像我前面说到，苹果只是一个电脑公司。没有什么可以把苹果和竞争者截然分开。那些竞争对手们也能生产品质很好的所有这些产品。实际上，他们也尝试了。几年前，Gateway公司推出了一款平面电视机。他们制造电视机的水平很高，在此之前他们做液晶显示器已经很多年了。但他们推出的平板电视机无人问津。戴尔电脑也推出了自己的MP3播放器和PDA，他们的产品品质也很优秀，也设计良好。同样没有人买。想想吧，我们都难以想像，从戴尔买一台MP3播放器是怎么一回事。你干嘛要从一家电脑公司买一台MP3播放器呢？但我们每天就是这么做的。顾客不会购买你的产品，他们会买你制作它的理由。商业的目的不是和那些他有求你有供的人做生意，是和那些信念相同的人做生意。这就是我的主要论点。

None of what I'm telling you is my opinion.It's all grounded in the tenets of biology.Not psychology, biology.If you look at a cross-section of the human brain, looking from the top down, What you see is the human brain is actually broken into three major components that correlate perfectly with the golden circle.Our newest brain, our homo sapien brain, our neocortex, corresponds with the ”what“ level.The neocortex is responsible for all of our rational and analytical thought and language.The middle two sections make up our limbic brains.And our limbic brains are responsible for all of our feelings, like trust and loyalty.It's also responsible for all human behavior, all decision-making, and it has no capacity for language.我所说的没有一个是我的观点，都是生物学的观念。对，不是心理学，是生物学。如果从上方俯视大脑的横截面图，你所看到的是人的大脑分为三个主要的部分，正好和与黄金环的三个部分对应。我们最新的脑部，即我们智人（生物学概念，指有了现代智慧的人种）的脑部，或者说我们的大脑皮层(neocortex)，对应着“是什么”这个环。大脑皮层负责我们所有的理性和逻辑的思考和语言组织。中间的两个部分是我们的边脑(limbic brain)，边脑负责我们所有的情感，比如信任和忠诚，也负责所有的人体行动和做出决策。同时，这部分没有语言功能。

In other words, when we communicate from the outside in, yes, people can understand vast amounts of complicated information like features and benefits and facts and figures.It just doesn't drive behavior.When we can communicate from the inside out, we're talking directly to the part of the brain that controls behavior, and then we allow people to rationalize it with the tangible things we say and do.This is where gut decisions come from.You know, sometimes you can give somebody all the facts and figures, and they say, ”I know what all the facts and details say, but it just doesn't feel right.“ Why would we use that verb, it doesn't ”feel“ right? Because the part of the brain that controls decision-making, doesn't control language.And the best we can muster up is, ”I don't know.It just doesn't feel right.“ Or sometimes you say you're leading with your heart, or you're leading with your soul.Well, I hate to break it to you, those aren't other body parts controlling your behavior.It's all happening here in you limbic brain, the part of the brain that controls decision-making and not language.换句话说，在这个黄金圆环上当我们从外向内沟通时，我们可以让人们理解大量复杂的信息，比如特点，好处，事实，还有图表，但就是无法激发他们的行动。当我们可以从内向外沟通时，我们就是在直接与大脑中控制行动的部分沟通，然后人们再理性地考虑我们所说和做的“怎样”和“什么”。这就是那些勇敢大胆决定的来源。你可能也知道，有时候你给了别人所有的事实和图表，然后他们说，“我知道所有的事实和细节是怎么回事，但就是感觉不对。” 我们为什么要用这个词，“感觉”不对？因为控制行动的那部分边脑，不控制语言，所以当边脑这部分拒绝的时候，我们想来想去只好说，“我不知道为什么，就是感觉不对。”有时候，你会说自己是在用心去带领，或者用灵魂去引导，嗯，我不愿意打断你，但这些都不是控制你行为的身体部分。控制你行为的是大脑的边脑部分，它控制了你做的决定，而不是语言。

But if you don't know why you do what you do, and people respond to why you do what you do, then how you ever get people to vote for you, or buy something from you, or, more importantly, be loyal and want to be a part of what it is that you do.Again, the goal is not just to sell to people who need what you have;the goal is to sell to people who believe what you believe.The goal is not just to hire people who need a job;it's to hired people who believe what you believe.I always say that, you know, if you hire people just because they can do a job, they'll work for your money, but if you hire people who believe what you believe, they'll work for your you with blood and sweat and tears.And nowhere else is there a better example of this than with the Wright brothers.如果你自己都不知道所作所为的理由，而人们需要这样的理由，你如何赢得大家对你的支持，从你这里下单购买，或者，更重要的，忠诚并且想成为你行动的一分子呢？再说一次，目标不是向那些有求于你的人销售，目标是向那些相信你所坚信的人销售，他们将为你付出热血，汗水和泪水。对于这一点，没有比莱特兄弟的故事更说明问题的了。

Most people don't know about Samuel Pierpont Langley.And back in the early 20th century, the pursuit of powered man flight was like the dot com of the day.Everybody was trying it.And Samuel Pierpont Langley had, what we assume, to be the recipe for success.I mean, even now, you ask people, ”Why did your product or why did your company fail?“ and people always give you the same permutation of the same three things, under-capitalized, the wrong people, bad market conditions.It's always the same three things, so let's explore that.Samuel Pierpont Langley was given 50,000 dollars by the War Deptartment to figure out this flying machine.Money was no problem.He held a seat at Harvard and worked at the Smithsonian and was extremely well-connected.He knew all the big minds of the day.He hired the best minds money could find.And the market conditions were fantastic.The New York Times followed him around everywhere.And everyone was rooting for Langley.Then how come you've never heard of Samuel Pierpont Langley? 绝大部分人都没有听说过塞缪尔·兰利这个人。在二十世纪早期，对载人飞行的探索的热情，就像今天对建立网络公司的热度一样。每个人都在尝试。塞缪尔·兰利有着我们大家所谓的成功的所有要素。是什么意思呢？比如今天，你要是问别人，“你的产品或公司为什么会失败？” 那人一定会给出同样三样事情的同样组合──资本不够，用人不善，市道不佳。总是这三个原因，那么让我们且来探讨一番，究竟如何。塞缪尔·兰利获得国防部五万美元投资，让他研制载人飞机。所以对他来说，资金不是问题；他又在哈佛有一个职位，并在Smithsonian博物馆工作，人脉很广很深。他也认识当时所有该领域的专家学者。他用手里的资金可以雇佣当时最好的专家。如果研制出来载人飞行器，市场前景更是无可限量。除此之外，《纽约时报》记者整天跟在他屁股后面等新闻──每个人都支持他。那么你今天怎么会从来没有听说过塞缪尔·兰利呢？

A few hundred miles away in Dayton Ohio, Orville and Wilbur Wright, they had none of what we consider to be the recipe for success.They had no money.They paid for their dream with the proceeds from their bicycle shop.Not a single person on the Wright brothers' team had a college education, not even Orville or Wilbur.And the New York Times followed them around nowhere.The difference was, Orville and Wilbur were driven by a cause, by a purpose, by a belief.They believed that if they could figure out this flying machine, it'll change the course of the world.Samuel Pierpont Langley was different.He wanted to be rich, and he wanted to be famous.He was in pursuit of the result.He was in pursuit of the riches.And lo and behold, look what happened.The people who believed in the Wright brothers' dream, worked with them with blood and sweat and tears.The others just worked for the paycheck.And they tell stories of how every time the Wright brothers went out, they would have to take five sets of parts, because that's how many times they would crash before they came in for supper.与此同时，在俄亥俄州戴顿市几百里外，奥维尔·莱特和维尔伯·莱特兄弟，他们俩没有任何我们认定的成功要素──他们资金匮乏，研制经费都来自于兄弟俩开的自行车铺的微薄利润；他们团队里的人没有一个上过大学，连他们俩自己也没上过；《纽约时报》记者更是不沾他们的边。不同的地方是，奥维尔和维尔伯有一个理由，一个目标，一个信仰驱使着他们去做这些事情。他们相信，如果他们能研制出来载人飞行器，将会改变世界。塞缪尔·兰利就不同了。他想要成名，想要发财。他追求的就是这两个结果。事情如何发展呢？ 那些相信莱特兄弟梦想的人，与他们同甘共苦，同洒热血泪水和汗水。其他人只是为工资单工作，而且他们还对外人讲述他们是怎么样在莱特兄弟出去的时候不得不偷偷拿走零件，因为他们晚餐都无以为继，生活濒于崩溃。

And, eventually, on December 17th, 1903, the Wright brothers took flight, and no one was there to even experience it.We found out about it a few days later.And further proof that Langley was motivated by the wrong thing, the day the Wright brothers took flight, he quit.He could have said, ”That's an amazing discovery guys, and I will improve upon your technology,“ but he didn't.He wasn't first, he didn't get rich, he didn't get famous, so he quit.1903年12月17日，莱特兄弟进行试飞成功，当时无人在场见证，而外界几天之后才知晓。后来事情进一步证实，塞缪尔·兰利动机不纯，因为在莱特兄弟试飞成功后，他退出了。他本来可以说：“干得真棒，伙计们！让我们在你们的技术基础上做个更好的！” 但是他没有。他是第一个投入研制的，却没能第一个成功，看来他没能成名，也无法借机发财，于是他放弃了。

People don't buy what you do;they buy why you do it.And if you talk about what you believe, you will attract those who believe what you believe.But why is it important to attract those who believe what you believe? Something called the law of diffusion of innovation.And if you don't know the law, you definitely know the terminology.The first two and a half percent of our population are our innovators.The next 13 and a half percent of our population are our early adopters.The next 34 percent are your early majority, your late majority and your laggards.The only reason these people buy touch tone phones is because you can't buy rotary phones anymore.人们不会为你所做的买单；他们为你这么做的理由买单。如果你讲述你的信念，你会吸引那些与你具有同样信念的人。为什么吸引和你信念相同的人这么重要呢？是因为一个革新扩散的法则在起作用。如果你没有听说过这个法则的话，你肯定知道这个概念。在这个社会里，2.5%的人是革新者，接下来的13.5%的人是我们早期的采用者，后面的34%是早期的主流，后面还有晚期的主流，以及最后拖后腿的人，这些拖后腿的人购买按键电话的唯一原因是因为他们再也买不到转盘电话了。

(Laughter)（笑）

We all sit at various places at various times on this scale, but what the law of diffusion of innovation tells us is that if you want mass-market success or mass-market acceptance of an idea, you cannot have it until you achieve this tipping point between 15 and 18 percent market penetration.And then the system tips.And I love asking businesses, ”What's your conversion on new business?“ And they love to tell you, ”Oh, it's about 10 percent,“ proudly.Well, you can trip over 10 percent of the customers.We all have about 10 percent who just ”get it.“ That's how we describe them, right.That's like that gut feeling, ”Oh, they just get it.“ The problem is: How do you find the ones that get it before you're doing business with them versus the ones who don't get it? So it's this here, this little gap, that you have to close, as Jeffrey Moore calls it, ”crossing the chasm.“ Because, you see, the early majority will not try something until someone else has tried it first.And these guys, the innovators and the early adopters, they're comfortable making those gut decisions.They're more comfortable making those intuitive decisions that are driven by what they believe about the world and not just what product is available.在这个刻度上，我们不同的时候处在不同的区间内，但是革新扩散法则告诉我们，如果你想要大众市场的成功，或是大众市场接受一个观念，你只有到达15%到18%这个市场份额的转折点的时候才会发生。我总是问企业，“你的新业务什么时候开始转变？” 他们喜欢告诉我说，“噢，大概10%。” 很自豪地说。好吧，算你可以遍访10%的客户。我们都有10%的客户已经“接受”了。那是我们怎样描述他们，那就像那种勇敢的感觉，“哦，他们刚刚接受了。” 问题是，在你和他们做生意之前，你怎样找到那些接受了的人而非那些不接受的人呢？所以就是这儿，就是这条小沟，你必须弥补，就像杰夫瑞·摩尔说的，“跨越鸿沟”。因为，你看，那些早期的主流人群不会尝试新事物，直到别人先尝试过了。而这些人，这些革新者和早期采用者，他们勇于尝试新事物，他们更易于凭直觉做决定，靠的是他们对世界的信念，而非只是市场上有什么样的产品。

These are the people who stood on line for six hours to buy an iPhone when they first came out, when you could have just walked into the store the next week and bought one off the shelf.These are the people 40,000 dollars on flat screen TVs when they first came out, even though the technology was substandard.And, by the way, they didn't do it because the technology was so great.They did it for themselves.It's because they wanted to be first.People don't buy what you do;they buy what you do it.And what you do simply proves what you believe.In fact, people will do the things that prove what they believe.The reason that person bought the iPhone in the first six hours, stood in line for six hours, was because of what they believed about the world, and how they wanted everybody to see them.They were first.People don't buy what you do;they buy why you do it.就是这样的人，当iPhone推出的时候愿意排上六个小时的队，第一时间买到手，哪怕一个星期后，你就可以轻松走进店里随意从货架上拿一个下来。就是这些人，在平板电视刚推出的时候，愿意花费四万美元购买，即使技术还没完全成熟。对，顺便提一句，他们这么做不是因为产品的技术有多么伟大。他们是为自己而购买。因为他们就是想喝头羹汤。所以还是那句话，人们不因你所做的而买单，他们因你所做的理由而买单，你的行动就证明了你的信念。实际上，人们会做那些证明他们信念的事情。那些在iPhone开售前排队6个小时的人，是因为他们对世界的看法──智能手机和移动计算将是业界的未来，于是他们排队证明给世人看，他们将是第一批走向这个未来的人。人们不为你的行为买单，他们为你的信念买单。

So let me give you a famous example, a famous failure and a famous success of the law of diffusion of innovation.First, the famous failure.It's a commercial example.As we said before, a second ago, the recipe for success is money and the right people and the right market conditions.Right.You should have success then.Look at TiVo.From the time TiVo came out, about eight or nine years ago, to this current day, they are the single highest-quality product on the market, hands down, there is no dispute.They were extremely well-funded.Market conditions were fantastic.I mean, we use TiVo as verb.I TiVo stuff on my piece of junk Time Warner DVR all the time.关于革新扩散理论，让我给你一个著名的例子，一个著名的失败和一个著名的成功例子。首先，著名的失败例子，是在商业领域内的。像我前面提到的，成功的要素是资金充裕，用人为善，市道正好。没错，这样你就可以享有成功了。那么看看TiVo吧。从八、九年前TiVo问世，直到今天，他们都是市场上唯一品质最高的产品。（对听众）不用举手，这没什么可争议。他们资金极为充裕，市场需求非常好。我们几乎把TiVo当作日常用语了──我一直把东西TiVo在我那时代华纳的垃圾DVR里面。

But TiVo's a commercial failure.They've never made money.And when they went IPO, their stock was at about 30 or 40 dollars and then plummeted, and it's never traded above 10.In fact, I don't even think it's traded above six, except for a couple of little spikes.Because you see, when TiVo launched their product, they told us all what they had.They said, ”We have a product that pauses live TV, skips commercials, rewinds live TV and memorizes your viewing habits without you even asking.“ And the cynical majority said, ”We don't believe you.We don't need it.We don't like it.You're scaring us.“ What if they had said, ”If you're the kind of person who likes to have total control over every aspect of your life, boy, do we have a product for you.It pauses live TV, skips commercials, memorizes your viewing habits, etc., etc.“ People don't buy what you do;they buy why you do it.And what you do simply serves as the proof of what you believe.但是TiVo是个商业上的大失败。他们从未盈利。当他们上市时，他们的股票价格大约30到40美元，然后就直线下跌，而成交价格从没超过10美元，实际上，我记得就没有超过6美元，除了几次价格小涨起落。为什么？因为你看，当TiVo发布产品的时候，他们告诉我们顾客的是他们的“what是什么”。他们说，“我们有一个产品，可以暂停直播电视节目，跳过广告，倒回节目开始，记住你的观看习惯，甚至你都不用设置。” 而挑剔的大众回答，“我们不相信你，我们不需要这个东西，我们也不喜欢它，你在唬人。” 市场反应如此糟糕！要是他们像下面这样说会怎样呢，“如果你是那种喜欢全面掌控生活每个方面的人，伙计，我们这儿为你量身打造一款产品，它可以暂停直播电视节目，跳过广告，倒回节目开始，记住你的观看习惯，等等等等。” 人们不因你所做的而买单，他们因你所做的理由而买单，你的行动就证明了你的信念。

Now let me give you a successful example of the law of diffusion of innovation.In the summer of 1963, 250,000 people showed up on the mall in Washington to hear Dr.King speak.They sent out no invitations, and there was no website to check the date.How do you do that? Well, Dr.King wasn't the only man in America who was a great orator.He wasn't the only man in America who suffered in a pre-civil rights America.In fact, some of his ideas were bad.But he had a gift.He didn't go around telling people what needed to change in America.He went around and told people what he believed.”I believe.I believe.I believe,“ he told people.And people who believed what he believed took his cause, and they made it their own, and they told people.And some of those people created structures to get the word out to even more people.And low and behold, 250,000 people showed up on the right day, at the right time, to hear him speak.现在我再给你一个革新扩散法则的成功例子。1963年夏天，25万人汇集华盛顿DC，聆听马丁·路德·金博士的演讲。没有什么邀请信，没有什么网站让你查演讲日期。怎么做到（汇集这么多人）的？ 金博士并非美国唯一伟大的演说家，他不是唯一饱受社会歧视之苦的人。实际上，他的部分观点很糟糕。但他有一个天分。他没有巡回告诉人们要做什么去改变美国。他巡回演讲告诉人们他的信念。“我相信有一天……我相信……我相信……” 他告诉人们。

How many of them showed up for him? Zero.They showed up for themselves.It's what they believed about America that got them to travel in a bus for eight hours, to stand in the sun in Washington in the middle of August.It's what they believed, and it wasn't about black versus white.25 percent of the audience was white.Dr.King believed that there are two types of laws in this world, those that are made by a higher authority and those that are made by man.And not until all the laws that are made by man are consistent with the laws that are made by the higher authority, will we live in a just world.It just so happened that the Civil Rights Movement was the perfect thing to help him bring his cause to life.We followed, not for him, but for ourselves.And, by the way, he gave the ”I have a dream“ speech, not the ”I have a plan“ speech.而那些和他怀有同样信念的人接受了他的理由，把它们变为自己的观念，再告诉别人。还有人进一步构建信念把话语传给更多的人，结果，25万人在那天准时出现，聆听他演讲。有多少人是为金博士而来？没有谁是。他们为自己而来，是他们自己对美国的信念把他们带上大巴，跋涉八个小时，在八月夏日的太阳底下来到华盛顿。这是他们的信念，这信念无关黑人与白人，现场听众有25%是白人。金博士相信世间有两种法则，一种是上帝制定的，一种是世人制定的。直到世人制定的法律和上帝制定的律法相符合，我们才真正生活在公义的世界里。只是碰巧民权运动是帮他将信念付诸实现的最佳载体。我们跟随他，不是为了他，是为了我们自己。顺便说一句，他的演讲是“我有一个梦想”，不是“我有一个方案”。

(Laughter)（大笑）

Listen to politicians now with their comprehensive 12-point plans.They're not inspiring anybody.Because there are leaders and there are those who lead.Leaders hold a position of power or authority.But those who lead inspire us.Whether they're individuals or organizations, we follow those who lead, not because we have to, but because we want to.We follow those who lead, not for them, but for ourselves.And it's those who start with ”why" that have the ability to inspire those around them or find others who inspire them.听听今天的政治人物提出的综合12点方案，对听众而言真是毫无激动人心之处。有两种人，一种是领导，一种是能领导的人。领导只是处在有权力或权威的位置。但能领导的人才能激励我们，不论他们是个人还是组织。我们跟随那些能领导的人，不是因为我们不得不，而是因为我们想要。我们跟随那些能领导的人，不是为他们，是为我们自己。正是那些从“为什么”开始的人，有能力激励他们周围的人，或者找到那些能激励他们的人。

Thank you very much.非常感谢！

第二篇：Ted演讲

私有制：中国经济奇迹的真正源泉

甚至连许多西方经济学家都认为,中国已经找到了主要依靠国家财政与控制的繁荣之路。但是，他们大错特错了。

2009年3月 • 黄亚生

美国式资本主义的可信性是全球金融危机中最早的牺牲品之一。随着雷曼兄弟银行的破产倒闭，全世界的权威评论家一窝蜂地唱衰美国经济理念——有限政府、最小限度的监管和对信贷的自由市场分配等。在考虑以何种模式取代没落的美国模式时，有些人把目光转向了中国。在中国，市场受到严格的监管，而金融机构则由国家控制。在经历了华尔街的溃败后，焦躁不安的弗朗西斯•福山在《新闻周刊》（Newsweek）上撰文指出，中国式的国家资本主义“看起来越来越有吸引力了。”《华盛顿邮报》（Washington Post）的专栏作家大卫•伊格内修斯为基于孔子思想的“新干预主义”在全球的出现而高声欢呼；伊格内修斯引用理查德•尼克松间接称颂经济学家凯恩斯（John Maynard Keynes）的话说：“现在我们都中国化了。”

但是，在宣布新的中国世纪的曙光到来之前，全球的领导人和高管们需要好好再想一想，中国活力的源泉到底是什么。说到中国经济奇迹产生的原因，获得广泛认可的看法——那是专家治国论的胜利，共产党依靠国家控制的企业实现了向市场经济的逐步转型——从各个重要方面来讲都错了。这种标准的看法认为，企业家精神、私有财产权、金融自由化和政治改革对中国的经济奇迹只发挥了很小的作用。但是，基于对中国政府的调查数据和中央及地方政府文件的详细分析，我的研究结论是，财产权和私营企业是高速增长和贫困水平降低最主要的激励因素。

我们经常读到这样的文章，认为渐进主义是中国成功地从马克思主义转型到市场经济的关键因素；许多文章称赞北京摒弃了俄罗斯式的休克疗法，采用更加务实的方法，创建了良好的商业环境，让私营企业有机地发展。这种观点认为，通过在上世纪80年代首先进行小范围改革，中国经济发展的自由度和市场导向水平逐渐提高，并在90年代后期积蓄了发展动力。但事实并非如此。实际发生的情况是，上世纪80年代进行的金融自由化和私营企业的早期地方性试验，催生了乡镇企业最初的蓬勃发展。正是这些早期的收获——而并非国家主导的大规模基础设施投资和90年代的城市化——为中国奇迹奠定了真正的基础。尽管有许多专家将中国宏大的基础设施项目和利用外国资金建设的崭新工厂与印度破败不堪的公路和微不足道的外国直接投资流进行比较，但这种观点夸大了公共开支和外国投资对中国发展的贡献。直到上世纪90年代后期以前，这两种因素在中国的影响力所占比重都不大——它们的出现比80年代宽松的金融控制和最初的乡镇企业发展大潮要晚得多。在上世纪80年代，中国经济的发展要比90年代快得多，并且产生了更好的社会效益：贫困人口下降，贫富差距缩小，而且劳动力在GDP中所占份额——衡量从经济发展中人均获益的指标——显著上升。从1978年到1988年，生活水平低于中国贫困线的农村人口减少了1.5亿以上。而在90年代，尽管GDP几乎都达到了两位数增长，并且实施了大规模的基础设施建设，但贫困人口数量却只下降了6,000万。此外，在80年代，中国经济增长主要靠投资而不是消费驱动的程度远不像今天这样严重。

换句话说，企业资本主义与国家资本主义不同，它不仅带来了增长，而且还对增长所带来的利益进行了广泛的分配。企业主义（Entrepreneurialism）既充满活力，又符合社会道德。

西方媒体总爱把像北京、上海和深圳这样的大城市称颂为生机勃勃的发展中心（见图表）。而中国的农村地区，即使被提到，也通常被形容为贫困的穷乡僻壤。但是，只要对经济数据进行仔细分析，就会发现，对中国现代化城市高楼大厦的这些令人震撼的描述完全是一种误导：事实上，中国的农村才具有最大的经济活力，而政府的强势干预已经窒息了中心城市的企业家精神和所有权。

后一种观点的重要性无论怎样强调都不过分。中国资本主义的发展历史事实上大部分都可以被描述为两个中国的斗争：由市场推动的、富有企业家精神的农村与由国家主导的城市之间的斗争。无论何时何地，只要中国农村占据优势地位，中国的资本主义就是企业式的、独立于政治的，并且是充满竞争活力的。无论何时何地，只要中国城市占据主导地位，中国的资本主义就会朝着依赖于政治和国家集权的方向发展。

上海是中国城市发展最显著的象征，其现代化的摩天大楼、外国奢侈品商店和全国最高的人均GDP使其成为中国的模范城市——一个国家资本主义获得成功的最好例证。事实果真如此吗？采用更具有实际意义的经济成就指标来衡量，上海的发展远不及温州。温州是位于上海南边数百英里以外一个浙江省的城市，这里是企业资本主义的一片乐土。上世纪80年代初期，使温州闻名于世的仅仅是它那勤劳的农民。当时，在温州的500万居民中，城市人口还不到10%。如今，温州是中国最具活力的城市，其数量众多的企业主宰着欧洲的服装市场。而相比之下，曾经是中国最早的实业家乐园的上海，如今却很少涌现出本土企业家。

温州的转型几乎完全是靠自由市场政策来实现的。早在1982年，当地官员就开始试行民间借贷、自由利率、存贷款机构的跨地区竞争，以及向私营企业提供贷款等。温州市政府还大力保护私营企业家的财产权，并从其他诸多方面使城市更有利于企业的发展。

本土企业为民生福祉带来了什么变化吗？非常多。按人均GDP计，上海几乎是温州所在的浙江省的两倍（难以获得温州人均GDP的详细数据）。但是，如果衡量家庭收入——一般居民的实际的支出能力——这两个地区的繁荣程度就旗鼓相当了。2006年，一个典型上海居民的家庭收入比一个典型浙江居民的家庭收入高13%，但上海居民的非工薪收入水平（如政府福利）却几乎是浙江居民的两倍。两地居民的平均劳动收入大体相当。平均来看，上海居民从经营企业中获得的收入比浙江居民低44%，而从所拥有的资产中获得的收入则要低34%。这就意味着：国家资本主义可以提高城市高楼大厦的楼高和GDP的统计数据，但并未提升居民的实际生活水平。

如果研究一下浙江省与其北部近邻江苏省的经济状况，这种对比就会更加清晰。这两个省份可以进行近乎完美的比较。它们的地理条件差不多相同：都是沿海省份，江苏位于上海北面，而浙江位于上海南面。它们还拥有相似的企业发展历史：都对解放前上海的实业家

和企业家阶层做出过重大贡献。然而，在改革以后的若干年里，江苏省吸引了外国投资并从公共建设工程开支中受益颇多，而浙江省却不然。这种差异产生了令人吃惊的结果。

20年前，江苏省比浙江省更为富庶，但如今却比浙江穷，在每一项重要的经济和社会福利指标上都落后于浙江。平均来看，浙江居民的资产性收入要大大高于其北方邻省的居民，他们居住的房子更大，拥有电话、计算机、彩电、相机或汽车的比例更高。浙江的婴儿死亡率更低，浙江人的平均预期寿命更长，识字率也更高。值得注意的是，浙江的收入不平等程度也远远低于江苏。应该如何解释浙江更胜一筹的繁荣呢？最令人信服的解释是，在江苏，政府对经济干预过多，歧视本地企业而青睐外国资本；而浙江的官员则让本土企业家拥有自由支配权，允许他们构建更大、更富有活力的本地供应链。

中国经济奇迹的真正难解之处并不是其经济如何发展，而是西方专家为何对其发展历程的理解错误百出。一个原因是，这些外来旁观者误解了构成中国经济体系最基本的元素之一——乡镇企业——的性质。一些西方最知名的经济学家将乡镇企业称为具有中国特色——具有创新意义的混合体，在政府的控制下实现了高速增长——的资本主义象征。例如，诺贝尔奖得主约瑟夫•斯蒂格里兹就称赞乡镇企业为从社会主义到资本主义转型时最常见的问题——私人投资者的资产剥离——提供了具有独创性的解决方案1他认为，这些企业既具有公有制的形式，可以避免被掠夺，同时又能实现私营企业的高效率。

简而言之，西方经济学家常常认为乡镇企业归乡镇政府所有。就在2005年，另一位诺贝尔奖得主道格拉斯•罗斯在《华尔街日报》上撰文指出，乡镇企业“与经济学中的标准企业很少有相似之处” 2。但有证据表明，情况并非如此。在中国国务院1984年3月1日发布的一份政策性文件中，第一次正式提到了乡镇企业的名称。该文件将它们定义为“由乡镇主办的企业、由农民组成的联合企业、其他联合企业和个体企业。”“由乡镇主办的企业”一词指的是归乡镇所有并管理的集体企业。该政策文件中提到的所有其他企业均为私营企业：个人所有的企业或有多个股东的较大型企业——都是严格意义上的“经济学中的标准企业”。官方对“乡镇企业”一词的使用具有非常显著的一致性：它一直是既包括私营企业，也包括政府主办的企业。

西方经济学家之所以会犯错误，是因为他们认定该名称涉及到所有制。但中国官方却从地理含义上去理解它——位于乡镇的企业。中国农业部的记录证明，私人拥有并管理的企业实体在乡镇企业中占绝大部分。在1985年到2002年期间，集体所有制企业的数量于1986年达到顶峰，为173万家，而私营企业的数量却迅猛增长，从大约1050万家增加到超过2,000万家。换句话说，在改革时期，乡镇企业数量的增长完全归功于私营企业。到1990年，在改革的头10年中，此类私营企业雇用的劳动力数量占到了乡镇企业雇用劳动力总数的50%，而税后利润则占到了58%。

对中国发展的真正源泉的思想混乱也搅乱了外国人对中国企业出现在国际市场上的理解认知。人们常说，中国为全球竞争带来了新的企业模式，国家所有制与明智的运用政府对金融的控制相结合，创造了独一无二的竞争力源泉。计算机制造商联想公司就经常被赞颂为中国非传统商业环境中的一个杰作。

但是，联想的成功大部分要归功于其早期便在香港注册并在香港募集资本的能力，而香港被认为是世界上最自由的市场经济。1984年，联想公司从中国科学院获得了第一笔启

动资金，但其后所有重大投资的资金均来自于香港3。1988年，该公司从总部位于香港的中国技术公司获得了90万港币（11.6万美元）的投资，成立了合资公司，使联想能够将香港作为其法定的公司所在地。1993年，香港联想公司在香港证券交易所首次公开上市，集资1,200万美元。联想公司是香港基于市场的金融与法律体系的成功故事，而并非中国由国家控制的金融体系的成功案例。

当中国在汲取华尔街崩溃的教训，并准备应对全球经济低迷之时，它可能做的最糟糕的事情莫过于去接受它已经发现了比自由市场更高效的发展模式的说法。中国经济奇迹的真正经验其实非常传统——基于私有制和自由市场金融。中国的经验为全世界提供了非常及时的提示：旨在鼓励这些力量发展的改革的确奏效。

作者简介：

黄亚生，麻省理工学院Sloan管理学院副教授，从事政治经济学的教学工作，创建并管理麻省理工学院的中国和印度实验室，该实验室旨在帮助本土企业家提高管理技能。本文摘自其《具有中国特色的资本主义：企业精神与国家》（Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics: Entrepreneurship and the State）一书。

第三篇：Ted演讲

Tony Porter 谈对男性的呼吁

关于这场演讲

在TEDWomen，Tony Porter对全世界男性发出呼吁，别太“大男子主义”。他讲述了自己切身经历，阐述了为何这种在多数男性身上根深蒂固的观念，会致使男性对女性，以及对彼此发生不尊重、虐待和伤害。他提出解决办法：打破陈规，从“男子汉标准”中解放。

关于Tony Porter

Tony Porter是教育家和活动者，他为消除对女性暴力侵害所作的努力受到国际认可。

为何要听他演讲：

Tony Porter是非盈利组织“对男性的呼吁：终止对女性暴力侵害组织”的策划者和共同创始人。Porter的参与和自我检查的要点，与许多家庭暴力和性暴力项目紧密相联，施行于一些知名组织，如全国橄榄球联盟和全国职业篮球联赛，以及全国各地高校，包括美国西点军校和安纳波利斯美国海军学院。Porter还是美国国务院国际讲师，在刚果民主共和国做过大量工作。

他是酒精与药物成瘾研究机构纽约办公室的教员，在此，他参与编著了针对美国黑人化学品依赖的临床课程。他还为社会服务组织开发社会公正模型。

“Ted Bunch和Tony Porter就男性有责任终止对女性的暴力侵害，以精彩的亲身经历分享他们的观点，他们提出更正人们心中的男子汉标准，就是解决办法之

一。两人通过自己的人生经历，来说明家庭暴力问题，其实是公民权利问题。” —摘自My Sister's Place网站

Tony Porter的英语网上资料

首页：acalltomen.com

[TED科技‧娱乐‧设计]

已有中译字幕的TED影片目录（繁体）（简体）。请注意繁简目录是不一样的。

Tony Porter 谈对男性的呼吁

我在纽约长大，位于哈莱姆区跟布朗克斯区之间。作为男孩子，大人教给我们，男人必须要坚决，要强壮，要勇敢，要强硬；不许痛苦，不许表露情感，愤怒除外。当然，也不能畏缩。男性负责，也就是说女性不用。男性引路，你们只要跟着照做就好。男性高一等，女性低一等。男性强大，女性弱小。女性价值不大，是男性的所有物，是物品。更确切说，是性对象。后来我知道，那是男性的社会形象标准，或称其为“男子汉的标准”。看看这里面都有什么，所有关于如何做

才够男人的定义。我还想说，毫无疑问，作为男人，有很多美好的事情，非常美好。但与此同时，有些东西实在非常纠结。我们确实需要开始质疑它，审视它，并对我们所熟知的男子汉标准进行拆析和重定义。

这是我的两个孩子，Kendall和Jay，一个11岁，一个12岁。Kendall比Jay大15个月。有段时间我的妻子，她叫Tammie，还有我，我们非常忙，叮，咚，当，Kendall和Jay诞生了。（笑声）当他们长到五六岁，四五岁时，Jay可以过来，哭着跑过来。至于她为什么哭没有关系，她可以趴在我的膝盖上，拿我的袖子擦鼻涕。哭吧，大声哭，爸爸在呢，就是这样。

另一方面，如果Kendall，如我所说，他只比妹妹大15个月，他哭着跑过来，或是只要我听到他的哭声，就要拉警报了。我会给他大约30秒的时间，也就是说，等他到我跟前，我就会说，“你哭什么哭？抬起头来，看着我，告诉我怎么了？告诉我怎么了？我不能理解，你为什么哭？”由于自己的失职，我有责任和义务把他教育成一个男人，让他符合这些男子汉标准中的条条框框。我发现我会这么说，“回你的房间去。回去，回你的房间。坐下，振作一下，再回来跟我说话，当你可以像...” 像什么？（观众：男人）“像男人一样。”他才五岁。当我这么做的时候，我会对自己说，“天呢，我是怎么了？我在做什么？我为什么要这样？”回想一下，我想到了我父亲。

有一段时间，我们家发生了一次很痛苦的经历。我哥哥，Henry，当我们十几岁的时候，他死于不幸。如我所说，我们住在纽约，当时我们住在布朗克斯区。葬礼在一个叫长岛的地方举行，距市区有两小时车程。当我们准备从墓地返回时，车子停在洗手间旁，让大家在长途返回之前下车方便一下。随后人们都下车了，我母亲，我姐姐，我姑姑，她们都出去了，只有我爸爸和我留在车里。女人们离

开不久，他便放声大哭。他不想在我面前哭，但他知道，回去的路上他会忍不住的。在我面前哭，要比在有女性的场合下哭的好。这个男人，在10分钟之前，刚刚把他年幼的儿子亲手埋葬。这种痛苦是我无法想象的。我印象最深的是，他为在我面前哭而向我道歉。同时，他还给我鼓励，把我举起来，因为我没哭。

我重新审视这件事。作为男人，我们会害怕，这种害怕让我们瘫痪，让我们成为男子汉的标准的奴隶。我还记得跟一个12岁男孩的对话，他是足球选手。我问他，我说，“如果当着所有队员的面，教练说你踢球像个女孩，你会怎么样？”我本以为他会说，我会很伤心，很愤怒，很生气之类的。但不，男孩这么跟我说，男孩说，“这会把我毁掉。”于是我自问，“天呢，如果被称作女孩就会把他毁掉，那么关于女孩，我们都教给他些什么？”

（掌声）

这把我带回了我的12岁那年。我在市区的廉租公寓长大，那时我们住在布朗克斯区。一个叫Johnny的家伙住在我家附近，他当时16岁左右，我们都12岁左右，比较小。他总是跟我们这些小孩呆在一起。这个家伙，他经常不干好事。他让很多家长感到奇怪，“这个16岁孩子，在一群12岁孩子中做什么？”他也确实不做好事。他是个问题少年，母亲因海洛因摄入过量而死，奶奶把他养大，父亲不管他。他奶奶有两份工作，他经常独自在家。我说过，我们都是小孩，得仰望这个大哥哥。他很酷，他很好。这是那些小妹妹说的，“他很好。”他做过爱，我们都仰望他。

一天，我出门玩，就在周围玩，我记不得在玩什么。他在窗口，叫我上去。他说，“嘿，Anthony。”小时候他叫我Anthony。“嘿，Anthony，快上来。”Johnny

叫我，我就去。我跑上楼。他打开门后，对我说，“你想要吗？”我立刻明白了他的意思。因为在我们长大的那个年代，根据当时的男子汉标准，“你想要吗”只有两层意思，不是性就是毒品。而我们不吸毒。我的准则，我的男子汉准则，立刻受到威胁。有两点：一，我没做过爱。男人之间不讨论这个。你只会告诉最亲密的朋友，让他发誓保密，跟他讲你的第一次。而对其他人，则会说我两岁就开始做爱了，没什么第一次可言。（笑声）另一点我不能说的是，我不想要。这样更糟。我们应该时刻窥伺，女性只是物品，确切说，是性对象。总之，这些我都不能说。所以，就如我母亲所言，长话短说，我只是对Johnny说，“好。”他让我到他房间里。我进去了，躺在床上的是个叫Sheila的邻居女孩，她16岁，全身赤裸。现在来看，她有心理疾病，有时会比其他人更自闭。我们给她取了很多不好的绰号。总之，Johnny刚跟她做完爱。其实，他强奸了她，但他会说是做爱。因为，当时Sheila没有说“不”，她也没说“是”。

因此他给我机会也这样做。于是我走进去，关上门。各位，我呆住了。我依门而立，这样Johnny不能破门而入，发现我什么都没干。我站了好长一会，长到足够我干点什么了。现在，我想的不是要做什么，而是要怎么出去。我只有12岁，但很聪明。我把裤拉链拉下来，走进客厅。我看到的是，当我和Sheila在房间里时，Johnny到窗边招呼别人上来，所以现在满屋子都是人，就像医生的候诊室。他们问我感觉如何，我对他们说，“感觉不错。”然后在他们面前拉上裤拉链，走出门去。

我是带着愧疚说出这段的。当时我也带着极大的愧疚感，但我很矛盾。因为我感到愧疚的同时，又感到兴奋，我没被抓住。而对发生的一切，我觉得糟糕。这种害怕脱离了男子汉的标准，完全包住了我。对我来说，我和我的男子汉标准，曾经比Sheila和她的遭遇更重要。总的来说，我们作为男人，被教育说女性价值

不大，把她们看做所有物，看做男人的性对象，这就形成一个等式，等号右边是对女性的暴力侵害。我们作为男人，作为好男人，就如大多数的男人，我们所做的事，都是在这个社会形象标准下进行。我们以为自己不在此列，但其实我们正是其中之一。看到了吗，我们必须明白，这类价值不大，所有物，性对象的观念，致使暴力现象频频发生。因此解决办法就在我们身上，同时问题也在我们身上。疾病控制中心说过，男性对女性的暴力现象，已达到流行病的普遍程度，是女性的最大健康隐忧。国内如此，国外亦如此。

所以我再简单说几句。这是我生命中的挚爱，我女儿Jay，我希望她的世界里，我会希望男性如何对待女性？我需要你们与我一道，共同努力。你我共同合作，致力于如何培养我们的儿子，教导他们成为男人。可以不强硬，也可以表露情感，可以促进平等，可以拥有女性朋友，就是这样，可以做一个完整的人。我们男性的解放，与你们女性的解放相依存。我问过一个九岁男孩，我问他说，“如果你不用再遵循这些男子汉标准，你会怎样？”他告诉我，“我就自由了。”

第四篇：Ted演讲

Ralph Langner谈21世纪电子武器Stuxnet揭密

关于这场演讲

Stuxnet计算机蠕虫于2010年首次被发现，带来了令人费解的谜团。除了它不寻常且高度复杂的编码以外，还隐藏着一个更令人不安的谜团：它的攻击目标。Ralph Langner及其团队协助破解Stuxnet编码，找出这个数字弹头的最终攻击目标－以及其幕后源头。经使用计算机数字鉴识方法深入检视后，他解释了其运作原理。

关于Ralph Langner

Ralph Langner是德国控制系统的安全顾问。他对Stuxnet恶意软件的分析受到全球瞩目。

为什么要听他演讲

Ralph Langner为独立网络安全公司Langner的领导者，专营控制系统－监控和调控其它设备的电子装置，如生产设备。这些装置与运作我们城市和国家的基础设施有密切关系，这使它们逐渐成为一场新兴且具高度复杂型态的电子战争攻击目标。自2010年起，当Stuxnet计算机蠕虫首次现身时，Langner坚决地投身于这个战场。

身为致力于译码这个神秘程序的一份子，Langner和他的团队分析Stuxnet的数据结构，并找出他认为其最终的攻击目标：运行于核工厂离心机的控制系统软件－特别是伊朗的核工厂。Langner进一步分析，发现Stuxnet可能的幕后源头，并于TED2011演讲中透露这个秘密。

Ralph Langner的英语网上资料

网站：Langner

[TED科技‧娱乐‧设计]

已有中译字幕的TED影片目录（繁体）（简体）。请注意繁简目录是不一样的。

Ralph Langner谈21世纪电子武器Stuxnet揭密

Stuxnet计算机蠕虫背后的想法其实很简单，我们不希望伊朗造出原子弹，他们发展核武器的主要资产是纳坦兹的浓缩铀工厂，你们看到的灰色方块是实时控制系统，现在，如果我们设法破坏控制速度和阀门的驱动系统，我们事实上可以使离心机产生很多问题。这些灰色方块无法执行Windows软件，两者是完全不同的技术，但如果我们设法将一个有效的Windows病毒放进一台笔记本电脑里，由一位机械工程师操作，设定这个灰色方块，那么我们就可以着手进行了，这就是Stuxnet大致背景。

因此，我们从Windows释放程序开始，让病毒载体进入灰色方块中，破坏离心机，延迟伊朗的核计划，任务完成，很简单，对吧？我想说明我们是如何发现这个的，当我们在半年前开始研究Stuxnet时，对这个东西的攻击目标一无所知，唯一了解的是它在Windows的部份非常、非常复杂，释放程序部份使用多个零日漏洞，它似乎想要做些什么，用这些灰色方块，这些实时控制系统，因此，这引起我们的注意，我们开始了一个实验计划，我们用Stuxnet感染我们的系统并审视结果，然后一些非常有趣的事发生了。Stuxnet表现得像只白老鼠，不喜欢我们的奶酪，闻一闻，但不想吃。这根本没道里。之后，我们用不同口味的奶酪进行实验，我意识到，哦，这是一个直接攻击，完全直接的。释放程序在这些灰

色方块中有效的潜伏着，如果它发现了一个特定程序组态，甚至是它正试图感染的程序，它都会确实针对这个目标执行，如果没发现，Stuxnet就不起作用。

所以这真的引起了我的注意，我们开始进行这方面的工作，几乎日以继夜，因为我想，好吧，我们不知道它的目标是什么，很可能的，比方说美国的发电厂，或德国的化工厂，所以我们最好尽快找出目标。因此，我们抽出攻击代码并进行反编译，我们发现它的结构由两个数字炸弹组成，一个较小、一个较大。我们也看到，这是非常专业的设计，由显然知道所有内幕信息的人编写，他们知道所有必需攻击的位和字节，搞不好他们还知道控制员的鞋子尺寸，因此他们什么都知道。

如果你曾听过Stuxnet的释放程序，是复杂、高科技的，让我跟你们说明一下。病毒本身是很高科技没错，比我们曾见过的任何编码都高深，这是这个实际攻击代码的样本，我们谈论的是大概15,000行的代码，看起来很像旧式的汇编语言。我想告诉你们的是，我们如何能够理解这段代码，所以，我们首先要寻找的是系统的函数调用，因为我们知道它们的作用是什么。

然后，我们寻找时间控制器和数据结构，试图将其与真实世界连结起来，寻找现实世界中的潜在目标，因此我们必需进行目标推测，以便确认或排除。为了找到推测目标，我们想到，它必定具有绝对破坏性，必定是一个高价值目标，最可能设置在伊朗，因为这是大部份感染发生的地点。在这区域内你不会找到几千个目标，基本上范围可以缩小为布什尔核电厂及纳坦兹浓缩铀工厂。

所以我告诉我的助手，“列出我们客户中所有离心机和核电厂专家的名单”，我打电话给他们，听取他们的意见，努力用我们在代码和数据中的发现与他们的专业知识做对照。这很有效，因此，我们找出了这个小数字弹头与转子控制的关联，转子是离心机内部的运转零件，就是你们看到的这个黑色物体，如果控制这个转子的速度，事实上你就能使转子损坏，甚至最后使离心机爆炸。我们也看到了这次攻击的目标，实际上进行的相当缓慢、低调，显然为了达成目标，快把维修工程师逼疯了，因为他们无法迅速找出答案。

这个大数字弹头－我们做过尝试，非常仔细检查数据和数据结构，因此，例如数字164在这些代码中确实很突出，你不能忽视它。我开始研究科学文献，这些离心机如何在纳坦兹组建，并找出它们的结构，就是所谓的层级。每个层级由164台离心机组成，这就说的通了，与我们的结果匹配。

而它甚至更有帮助。这些在伊朗的离心机细分为15种所谓的等级，你猜我们在攻击代码中发现什么？一个几乎相同的结构。所以，同样的，这与结果完美匹配，就我们所寻找的东西来说，这给了我们相当大的信心。别误解我的意思，不是像这样弹指之间，为了获致这些成果，历经几星期相当艰苦的奋斗，我们常常走进死胡同，必需重新来过。

总之，我们找到了这两个数字弹头，实际上是针对同一个目标，但从不同角度。小弹头对准一个层级，让转子加速旋转然后急遽减速，而大弹头影响六个层级并操纵阀门，总之，我们非常有信心，我们已经确认目标是什么，是纳坦兹，就只有纳坦兹。因此，我们不必担心其它目标可能被Stuxnet攻击。

我们看到一些非常酷的东西，真的让我印象深刻。下方是灰色方块，顶端你们看到的是离心机，这些东西所做的是拦截来自传感器的输入值，例如，来自压力传感器和振动传感器的，它提供正常代码，在攻击中依然执行，用的是假的输入数

据。事实上，这个假的输入数据是Stuxnet事先录制的，因此，这就像来自好莱坞电影的抢劫过程中，监视器被放入预录的影片，酷吧？

这里的想法显然不仅是愚弄控制室中的操作者，实际上更加危险且更具攻击性，这个想法是规避数字安全系统。我们需要数字安全系统，当一位人类操作员的行动不够快时，因此，例如在一座核电厂中，当一台大蒸汽涡轮机严重超速时，你必须在一毫秒内打开泄压阀。显然，一位人类操作员办不到，因此，这就是我们需要使用数字安全系统之处。当它们被破坏，真正糟糕的事就会发生了，你的工厂会爆炸，无论你的操作员或安全系统都无法注意到这一点，这很可怕。

但还会更糟。我要说的这些相当重要，想想看，这种攻击是一般性的，它没什么特定性，对离心机来说，还有浓缩铀，因此，它也会作用于，例如一座核电厂或一座汽车工厂，它是通用的，你不需要－身为攻击者，你不需要藉由USB装置传递这个病毒载体，如我们在Stuxnet例子中看到的，你也可以使用传统的蠕虫病毒技术的来散播，尽可能传播四方。如果你这么做，最终它会变成具大规模破坏性的网络武器，这是我们必然会面临的后果。所以，不幸的是，这种攻击最大量的目标并不是在中东，而是在美国、欧洲和日本。因此，所有这些绿色区域就是遭受最多攻击的目标，我们必须面对这个后果，我们最好现在开始做准备。

谢谢。

（掌声）

Chris Anderson：我有个问题，Ralph，这件事已广为人知，人们认为摩萨德（以色列情报机构）是幕后的主要推手，你也这么认为吗？

Ralph Langner：好，你真的想知道吗？

Chris Anderson：是啊!

Ralph Langner：好，我的看法是，摩萨德有参与，但以色列并非领导势力。因此，背后的主导力量是网络超级大国，只有一个，就是美国。幸好、幸好，因为如果不是这样，我们的问题可能更大。

CA：谢谢你吓坏了美国人，谢谢Ralph。

第五篇：TED演讲

Martin Jacques: Understanding the rise of China

The world is changing with really remarkable speed.If you look at the chart at the top here, you’ll see that in 2025 these Goldman Sachs projections suggest that the Chinese economy will be almost the same size as the American economy.And if you look at the chart for 2050, it’s projected that the Chinese economy will be twice the size of the American economy, and the Indian economy will be almost the same size as the American economy.We should bear in mind here these projections were drawn up before the Western financial crises.A couple of weeks ago, I was looking at the latest projection by BNP(Banque Nationale de Paris)PARIBAS for when China will have a larger economy than the United States.Goldman Sachs projected 2027.The post-crisis projection is 2010.That’s just a decade way.China is going to change the world in two fundamental respects.First of all, it's a huge developing country with a population of 1.3 billion people, which has been growing for over 30 years at around 10% a year.And within a decade it will have the largest economy in the world.Never before in the modern era has the largest economy in the world been that of a developing country, rather than a developed country.Secondly, for the first time in the modern era, the dominant country in the world which I think is China will become, will be not from the West, and from very very different civilizational roots.Now I know it’s a widespread assumption in the West that as countries modernize, they also Westernize.This is an illusion.It’s an assumption that modernity is a product simply of competition markets and technology.It is not;it is also shaped equally by history and culture.China is not like the West, and it will not become like the West.It will remain in very fundamental respects very different.Now the big question here is obviously, how do we make sense of China? How do we try to understand what China is? And the problem we have in the West at the moment by-and-large is that the conventional approach is that we understand it really in Western terms, using Western ideas.We can’t.Now I want to offer you 3 building blocks for trying to understand what China is like just as a beginning.The first is this, that China is not really a nation state.Okay, it's called itself a nation state for the last hundred years.But everyone who knows anything about China knows it’s a lot older than this.This was what China looked with the victory of the Qin Dynasty in 221 B.C.at the end of warring state period—the birth of modern China.And you can see it against the boundaries of modern China.Or immediately afterward, the Han Dynasty, still 2000 years ago, and you can see already it occupies most of what we now know as Eastern China which is where the vast majority of Chinese lived then and live now.Now what is extraordinary about this is what gives China it’s sense of being China, what gives the Chinese the sense of what it is to be Chinese, comes not from the last hundred years, not from the nation state period which is what happened in the West, but from the period, if you like, of the civilization state.I’m thinking here, for example, of customs like ancestral worship, of a very distinctive notion of the state, likewise, a very distinctive notion of the family, social relationships like “guanxi”, Confucian values and so on.These are all things that come from the period of the civilization state.In other words, China, unlike the Western states and most countries in the world, is shaped by its sense of civilization, its existence as a civilization state, rather than as a nation state.And there’s one other thing to add to this, and that is this.Of course we know China’s big, huge demographically and geographically, with a population of 1.3 billion people.What we often aren’t really aware of is the fact that China is extremely diverse and very pluralistic, and in many ways very decentralized.You can’t run a place on this scale simply from Beijing, even though we think this to be the case.It’s never been the case.So this is China, a civilization state, rather than a nation state.And what does it mean? Well, I think it has all sorts of profound implications.I'll give you two quick ones.The first is that the most important political value for the Chinese is unity, is the maintenance of Chinese civilization.You know, 2000 years ago, Europe breakdown, the fragmentation of the Holy Roman Empire, it divided, and its remained divided ever since.China, over the same time period, went in exactly the opposite direction, very painfully holding this huge civilization, civilization state together.The second is, maybe more prosaic, which is Hong Kong.Do you remember the handover of Hong Kong by Britain to China in 1997? You may remember what the Chinese constitutional proposition was, one country, two systems.And I’ll lay a wager that barely anyone in the West believed them.Window dressing.When China gets its hands on Hong Knong, that won’t be the case.13 years on, the political and legal system in Hong Kong is as different now as it was in 1997.We were wrong.Why were we wrong? We were wrong because we though, naturally enough in nation state ways.Think of German unification, 1990.What happened? Well, basically the East was swallowed by the West.One nation, one system—that is the nation state mentality.But you can’t run a country like China, a civilization state on the basis of one civilization, one system.It doesn't work.So actually the response of China to the question of Hong Kong—as it will be to the question of Taiwan—was a natural response: one civilization, many systems.Let me offer you another building block to try to understand China, maybe it’s not such a comfortable one.The Chinese have a very very different conception of race to most other countries.Do you know of the 1.3 billion Chinese, over 90% of them think they belong to the same race, the Han.Now this is completely different from the other world’s most populous countries.India, the United States, Indonesia, Brazil—all of them are multiracial.The Chinese don’t feel like that.China is only multiracial really at the margins.So the question is, why? Well, the reason I think essentially is again back to the civilization state.Very very…you know, at least 2000 years, a history of conquest, absorption, assimilation and so on, led to the process by which over time this notion of the Han emerged, of course, nurtured by a growing and very powerful sense of cultural identity.Now the great advantage of this historical experience has been that, without the Han, China could never have held together.The Han identity has been the cement which has held this country together.The great disadvantage of it is that the Han have a very weak conception of cultural differences.They really believe in their own superiority, and they are disrespectful of those who are not.Hence their attitude, for example, to the Uyghurs and to the Tibetans.Or let me give you my third building block, the Chinese state.Now the relationship between the state and society in China is very different from that in the West.Now we in the West are overwhelmingly seem to think—in these days at least—that the authority and legitimacy of the state is a function of democracy.The problem of this proposition is that the Chinese state enjoys more legitimacy and more authority amongst the Chinese that is true with any Western state.And the reason for this is because—well, there’re two reasons I think.And it’s obviously got nothing to do with democracy, because in our terms the Chinese certainly don’t have a democracy.And the reason for this is, firstly, because the state in China is given a very special.It enjoys a very special significance as the representative, the embodiment and the guardian of Chinese civilization, of the civilization state.This is as close as China gets to a kind of spiritual role.And the second reason is because, whereas in Europe and North America, the state’s power is continuously challenged—I mean in the European tradition, historically against the church, against other sectors of the aristocracy, against merchants and so on.For 1000 years, the power of the Chinese state has not been challenged.It’s had no serious rivals.So you can see, the way in which power has been constructed in China is very different from our experience in Western history.The result, by the way, is that the Chinese have a very different view of the state.Whereas we tend to view it as an intruder, a stranger, certainly an organ whose powers need to be limited or defined and constrained, the Chinese don’t see the state like that at all.The Chinese view the state as an intimate—not just as an intimate actually, as a member of the family;not just in fact as a member of the family, but as the head of the family, the patriarch of the family.This the Chinese view of the state, very very different to us.It’s embedded in society in a different kind of way to what the case in the West.And I would suggest you that actually what we are dealing with here, in the Chinese context, is a new kind of paradigm, which is different from anything we’ve had to think about in the past.You know that China believes in the state and market, I mean, Adam Smith already writing in the late 18th century, said, “the Chinese market is larger and more developed and more sophisticated than anything in Europe.” And, apart from the Mao period, that remained more-or-less the case ever since.But this is combined with an extremely strong and ubiquitous state.The state is everywhere in China.I mean, its leading firms, many of them are still publicly owned.Private firms, however large they are, like Lenovo, depend in many ways on the state patronage.Targets for the economy and so on are set by the state.And the state, of course, its authority flows into lot of other areas as we are familiar with, with something like the one-child policy.Moreover, this is a very old state tradition, a very old tradition of statecraft.I mean, if you want an illustration of this, the Great Wall is one.But this is another, this is the Grand Canal, which was constructed in the first instance in the 5th century B.C.and was finally completed in the 7th century A.D.It went for 1114 miles, linking Beijing with Hangzhou and Shanghai.So there’s a long history of extraordinary state infrastructure projects in China, which I suppose helps us to explain what we see today, which is something like the Three Gorges Dam and many other expressions of state competence within China.So there we have 3 building blocks for trying to understand the difference that is China—the civilization state, the notion of race and the nature of the state and its relationship to society.And yet we still insist, by-and-large, in thinking that we can understand China by simply drawing on Western experience, looking at it through Western eyes, using Western concepts.If you want to know why we unerringly to get China wrong, our predictions about what’s going to happen to China are incorrect, this is the reason.Unfortunately I think, I have to say that I think attitude towards China is that of a kind of little Westerner mentality.There’s kind of arrogant.It’s arrogant in the sense that we think that we are best, and therefore we have the universal measure.And secondly, it’s ignorant.We refuse to really address the issue of difference.You know, there’s a very interesting passage in a book by Paul Cohen, the American historian.And Paul Cohen argues that the West thinks of itself as probably the most cosmopolitan of all cultures.But it’s not.In many ways, it’s the most parochial, because for 200 years, the West has been so dominant in the world that it’s not really needed to understand other cultures, other civilizations.Because at the end of the day, it could, if necessary by force, get its own way.Whereas those cultures, virtually the rest of the world in fact, which have been in a far weaker position, vis-à-vis the West, have been thereby forced to understand the West, because the West’s presence in those societies.And, they are, as a result, more cosmopolitan in many ways than the West.I mean take the question of East Asia: Japan, Korea, China, etc.a third of the world’s population lives there, now the largest economic region in the world.And I’ll tell you now, that East Asianers, people from East Asia, are far more knowledgeable about the West than the West is about East Asian.Now this point is very germane, I’m afraid, to the present.Because what’s happening? Back to that chart at the beginning the Goldman Sachs chart.What is happening is that, very rapidly in historical terms, the world is being driven and shaped, not by the old developed countries, but by the developing world.I mean we’ve seen this in terms of the G20 usurping very rapidly the position of the G7 or the G8.And there are 2 consequences of this, first, the West is rapidly losing its influence in the world.There was a dramatic illustration of this actually, a year ago, Copenhagen, climate change conference, Europe was not at the final negotiating table.When did that last happen? I would wager it was probably about 200 years ago, and that is what is going to happen in the future.And the second implication is that the world will inevitably as a consequence, become increasingly unfamiliar to us, because it’ll be shaped by cultures and experiences and histories that we are not really familiar with or conversant with.And at last, I’m afraid, take Europe, America is slightly different, but Europeans by and large I have to say are ignorant, are unaware about the way the world is changing.Some people, I’ve got an English friend in China, he said “the continent is sleepwalking into oblivion.” Well maybe that’s true, maybe that’s an exaggeration.But there’s another problem which goes along with this that Europe is increasing out of touch with the world and that is a sort of a loss of a sense of the future.I mean, Europe once, of course, once commanded the future in its confidence.Take the 19th century for example, but this, alas, is no longer true.If you want to feel the future, if you want to taste the future, try China—there’s old Confucius.This is a railway station the like of which you’ve never seen before.It doesn’t even look like a railway station.This is the new Guangzhou railway station for the high-speed trains.China already has more of the bigger network than any other country in the world and will soon have more than all the rest of the world put together.Or take this: now this is an idea, but it’s an idea to be tried out shortly in a suburb of Beijing.Here you have a megbus, on the upper deck carries about 2000 people.It travels on rails down a suburban road, and the cars travel underneath it.And it does speeds of up to about 100 miles an hour。

Now this is the way things are going to move, because China has a very specific problem, which is different from Europe and different from the United States.China has huge numbers of people and no space.So this is a solution to a situation where China’s going to have many, many, many cities over 20 million people。

Okay, so how would I like to finish? Well, what should our attitude be towards this world that we see very rapidly developing before us? I think there will be good things about it and there will be bad things about it.But I want to argue above all, a big picture positive for this world.You know, for 200 years, the world was essentially governed by a fragment of the human population.That’s what Europe and North America represented.The arrival of countries like China and India—between them 38% of the world’s population, and others like Indonesia and Brazil and so on, represent the most important single act of democratization in the last 200 years.Civilizations and cultures which had been ignored, which had no voice, which were not listened to, which were not known about, will have a different sort of representation in this world.As humanists, we must welcome, surely, this transformation.And we will have to learn about these civilizations.This big ship here was the one sailed in by Zheng He in the early 15th century on his great voyages around the South China Sea, the East China Sea and across the Indian Ocean to East Africa.The little boat in front of it, was the one in which, 80 years later, Christopher Columbus crossed the Atlantic.Or, look carefully at this silk scroll made by Zhu Zhou in 1368.I think they’re playing golf.Christ, the Chinese even invented golf.Welcome to the future.Thank you!

David Steindl Rast Want to be Happy be Grateful

There is something you know about me, something very personal, and there is something I know about every one of you and that's very central to your concerns.There is something that we know about everyone we meet anywhere in the world, on the street, that is the very mainspring of whatever they do and whatever they put up with, and that is that all of us want to be happy.In this, we are all together.How we imagine our happiness, that differs from one another, but it's already a lot that we have all in common, that we want to be happy.Now my topic is gratefulness.How is the connection between happiness and gratefulness? Many people would say, well, that's very easy.When you are happy, you are grateful.But think again.Is it really the happy people that are grateful? We all know quite a number of people who have everything that it would take to be happy, and they are not happy, because they want something else or they want more of the same.And we all know people who have lots of misfortune, misfortune that we ourselves would not want to have, and they are deeply happy.They radiate happiness.You are surprised.Why? Because they are grateful.So it is not happiness that makes us grateful.It's gratefulness that makes us happy.If you think it's happiness that makes you grateful, think again.It's gratefulness that makes you happy.Now, we can ask, what really do we mean by gratefulness? And how does it work? I appeal to your own experience.We all know from experience how it goes.We experience something that's valuable to us.Something is given to us that's valuable to us.And it's really given.These two things have to come together.It has to be something valuable, and it's a real gift.You haven't bought it.You haven't earned it.You haven't traded it in.You haven't worked for it.It's just given to you.And when these two things come together, something that's really valuable to me and I realize it's freely given, then gratefulness spontaneously rises in my heart, happiness spontaneously rises in my heart.That's how gratefulness happens.Now the key to all this is that we cannot only experience this once in a while.We cannot only have grateful experiences.We can be people who live gratefully.Grateful living, that is the thing.And how can we live gratefully? By experiencing, by becoming aware that every moment is a given moment, as we say.It's a gift.You haven't earned it.You haven't brought it about in any way.You have no way of assuring that there will be another moment given to you, and yet, that's the most valuable thing that can ever be given to us, this moment, with all the opportunity that it contains.If we didn't have this present moment, we wouldn't have any opportunity to do anything or experience anything, and this moment is a gift.It's a given moment, as we say.Now, we say the gift within this gift is really the opportunity.What you are really grateful for is the opportunity, not the thing that is given to you, because if that thing were somewhere else and you didn't have the opportunity to enjoy it, to do something with it, you wouldn't be grateful for it.Opportunity is the gift within every gift, and we have this saying, opportunity knocks only once.Well, think again.Every moment is a new gift, over and over again, and if you miss the opportunity of this moment, another moment is given to us, and another moment.We can avail ourselves of this opportunity, or we can miss it, and if we avail ourselves of the opportunity, it is the key to happiness.Behold the master key to our happiness in our own hands.Moment by moment, we can be grateful for this gift.Does that mean that we can be grateful for everything? Certainly not.We cannot be grateful for violence, for war, for oppression, for exploitation.On the personal level, we cannot be grateful for the loss of a friend, for unfaithfulness, for bereavement.But I didn't say we can be grateful for everything.I said we can be grateful in every given moment for the opportunity, and even when we are confronted with something that is terribly difficult, we can rise to this occasion and respond to the opportunity that is given to us.It isn't as bad as it might seem.Actually, when you look at it and experience it, you find that most of the time, what is given to us is opportunity to enjoy, and we only miss it because we are rushing through life and we are not stopping to see the opportunity.But once in a while, something very difficult is given to us, and when this difficult thing occurs to us, it's a challenge to rise to that opportunity, and we can rise to it by learning something which is sometimes painful.Learning patience, for instance.We have been told that the road to peace is not a sprint, but is more like a marathon.That takes patience.That's difficult.It may be to stand up for your opinion, to stand up for your conviction.That's an opportunity that is given to us.To learn, to suffer, to stand up, all these opportunities are given to us, but they are opportunities, and those who avail themselves of those opportunities are the ones that we admire.They make something out of life.And those who fail get another opportunity.We always get another opportunity.That's the wonderful richness of life.So how can we find a method that will harness this? How can each one of us find a method for living gratefully, not just once in a while being grateful, but moment by moment to be grateful.How can we do it? It's a very simple method.It's so simple that it's actually what we were told as children when we learned to cross the street.Stop.Look.Go.That's all.But how often do we stop? We rush through life.We don't stop.We miss the opportunity because we don't stop.We have to stop.We have to get quiet.And we have to build stop signs into our lives.When I was in Africa some years ago and then came back, I noticed water.In Africa where I was, I didn't have drinkable water.Every time I turned on the faucet, I was overwhelmed.Every time I clicked on the light, I was so grateful.It made me so happy.But after a while, this wears off.So I put little stickers on the light switch and on the water faucet, and every time I turned it on, water.So leave it up to your own imagination.You can find whatever works best for you, but you need stop signs in your life.And when you stop, then the next thing is to look.You look.You open your eyes.You open your ears.You open your nose.You open all your senses for this wonderful richness that is given to us.There is no end to it, and that is what life is all about, to enjoy, to enjoy what is given to us.And then we can also open our hearts, our hearts for the opportunities, for the opportunities also to help others, to make others happy, because nothing makes us more happy than when all of us are happy.And when we open our hearts to the opportunities, the opportunities invite us to do something, and that is the third.Stop, look, and then go, and really do something.And what we can do is whatever life offers to you in that present moment.Mostly it's the opportunity to enjoy, but sometimes it's something more difficult.But whatever it is, if we take this opportunity, we go with it, we are creative, those are the creative people, and that little stop, look, go, is such a potent seed that it can revolutionize our world.Because we need, we are at the present moment in the middle of a change of consciousness, and you will be surprised if you--I am always surprised when I hear how many times this word “gratefulness” and “gratitude” comes up.Everywhere you find it, a grateful airline, a restaurant gratefulness, a cafe gratefulness, a wine that is gratefulness.Yes, I have even come across a toilet paper that the brand is called Thank You.(Laughter)There is a wave of gratefulness because people are becoming aware how important this is and how this can change our world.It can change our world in immensely important ways, because if you're grateful, you're not fearful, and if you're not fearful, you're not violent.If you're grateful, you act out of a sense of enough and not of a sense of scarcity, and you are willing to share.If you are grateful, you are enjoying the differences between people, and you are respectful to everybody, and that changes this power pyramid under which we live.And it doesn't make for equality, but it makes for equal respect, and that is the important thing.The future of the world will be a network, not a pyramid, not a pyramid turned upside down.The revolution of which I am speaking is a nonviolent revolution, and it's so revolutionary that it even revolutionizes the very concept of a revolution, because a normal revolution is one where the power pyramid is turned upside down and those who were on the bottom are now on the top and are doing exactly the same thing that the ones did before.What we need is a networking of smaller groups, smaller and smaller groups who know one another, who interact with one another, and that is a grateful world.A grateful world is a world of joyful people.Grateful people are joyful people, and joyful people, the more and more joyful people there are, the more and more we'll have a joyful world.We have a network for grateful living, and it has mushroomed.We couldn't understand why it mushroomed.We have an opportunity for people to light a candle when they are grateful for something.And there have been 15 million candles lit in one decade.People are becoming aware that a grateful world is a happy world, and we all have the opportunity by the simple stop, look, go, to transform the world, to make it a happy place.And that is what I hope for us, and if this has contributed a little to making you want to do the same, stop, look, go.