ted英文演讲稿

第一篇：ted英文演讲稿

ted英文演讲稿：犯错的价值

每个人都会避免犯错，但或许避免犯错本身就是一种错误?请看以下这篇“犯错家“凯瑟琳舒尔茨告诉我们，或许我们不只该承认错误，更应该大力拥抱人性中“我错故我在“的本质。

So it's 1995, I'm in college, and a friend and I go on a road trip from Providence, Rhode Island to Portland, Oregon.And you know, we're young and unemployed, so we do the whole thing on back roads through state parks and national forests--basically the longest route we can possibly take.当时是95年 我在上大学 我和一个朋友开车去玩 从罗得岛的普罗旺斯区出发 到奥勒冈州的波特兰市。我们年轻、无业，于是整个旅程都在乡间小道 经过州立公园 和国家保护森林 我们尽可能绕着最长的路径

And somewhere in the middle of South Dakota, I turn to my friend and I ask her a question that's been bothering me for 2,000 miles.“What's up with the Chinese character I keep seeing by the side of the road?”My friend looks at me totally blankly.在南达科塔州之中某处 我转向我的朋友 问她一个 两千英里路途上 一直烦恼我的问题，“路边那个一直出现的中文字到底是什么?”我的朋友露出疑惑的神情

There's actually a gentleman in the front row who's doing a perfect imitation of her look.(Laughter)And I'm like, “You know, all the signs we keep seeing with the Chinese character on them.”

正如现在坐在第一排的这三位男士 所露出的神情一样，笑声)我说“你知道的 我们一直看到的那个路牌 写着中文的那个啊”

She just stares at me for a few moments, and then she cracks up, because she figures out what I'm talking about.她瞪着我的脸一阵子 突然笑开了 因为她总算知道我所指为何

And what I'm talking about is this.我说的是这个

(Laughter)Right, the famous Chinese character for picnic area.(笑声)没错，这就是代表野餐区的那个中文字

(Laughter)I've spent the last five years of my life thinking about situations exactly like this--why we sometimes misunderstand the signs around us，(笑声)过去的五年 我一直在思考 刚刚我所描述的状况 为什么我们会对身边的征兆 产生误解

and how we behave when that happens, and what all of this can tell us about human nature.当误解发生时我们作何反应 以及这一切所告诉我们的人性

In other words, as you heard Chris say, I've spent the last five years thinking about being wrong.换句话说，就像 Chris 刚才说的 过去五年的时间 我都在思考错误的价值

This might strike you as a strange career move, but it actually has one great advantage: no job competition.你可能觉得这是个奇异的专业 但有一项好处是不容置疑的： 没有竞争者。

(Laughter)In fact, most of us do everything we can to avoid thinking about being wrong, or at least to avoid thinking about the possibility that we ourselves are wrong.(笑声)事实上，我们大部分的人 都尽力不思考错误的价值 或至少避免想到我们有可能犯错。

We get it in the abstract.我们都知道这个模糊的概念。

We all know everybody in this room makes mistakes.我们都知道这里的每个人都曾经犯错

The human species, in general, is fallible--okay fine.人类本来就会犯错一只走鹃鸟 都会跳下悬崖

which is fine, he's a bird, he can fly.反正牠是鸟，牠可以飞

But the thing is, the coyote runs off the cliff right after him.但土狼也会跟着牠一起跳崖

And what's funny--at least if you're six years old--is that the coyote's totally fine too.那很好笑 如果你是个六岁儿童 土狼也很好

He just keeps running--right up until the moment that he looks down and realizes that he's in mid-air.牠就这么继续跑 直到牠往下看 发现自己漫步在空中

That's when he falls.这时候他才会往下掉

When we're wrong about something--not when we realize it, but before that--we're like that coyote after he's gone off the cliff and before he looks down.在我们犯错时 在我们意识到我们犯错时 我们就像那只土狼 还没意识到自己奔出悬崖

You know, we're already wrong, we're already in trouble, but we feel like we're on solid ground.我们已经错了 已经惹上麻烦了 但仍然感觉像走在地上

So I should actually correct something I said a moment ago.我应该改变我之前的说法

It does feel like something to be wrong;it feels like being right.犯错的感觉就和 正确的感觉一样

(Laughter)So this is one reason, a structural reason, why we get stuck inside this feeling of rightness.(笑声)事实上我们这种自以为对的感受 是有构造性的原因的

I call this error blindness.我称之为错误盲点

Most of the time, we don't have any kind of internal cue to let us know that we're wrong about something, until it's too late.大部份的时间里 我们身体里没有任何机制 提醒我们错了 直到木已成舟

But there's a second reason that we get stuck inside this feeling as well--and this one is cultural.但还有第二个理由 文化性的理由

Think back for a moment to elementary school.回想小学时代

You're sitting there in class, and your teacher is handing back quiz papers, and one of them looks like this.你坐在课堂里 你的老师发回小考考卷 像这样的小考考卷

This is not mine, by the way.虽然这张不是我的

(Laughter)So there you are in grade school, and you know exactly what to think about the kid who got this paper.(笑声)你从小学时代 就知道该对拿这张考卷的同学 下甚么评语

It's the dumb kid, the troublemaker, the one who never does his homework.笨蛋，捣蛋鬼 从不做功课的坏学生

So by the time you are nine years old, you've already learned, first of all, that people who get stuff wrong are lazy, irresponsible dimwits--

你不过才九岁 你已经懂得，首先 那些犯错的人 都是懒惰、不负责任的傻瓜

and second of all, that the way to succeed in life is to never make any mistakes.第二 想要在人生中成功 就不要犯错

We learn these really bad lessons really well.我们很早就得到这些错误讯息

And a lot of us--and I suspect, especially a lot of us in this room--deal with them by just becoming perfect little A students，而我们 尤其是这个大厅里的许多人 都因此成为好学生 拿全A perfectionists, over-achievers.完美主义、永不满意

Right, Mr.CFO, astrophysicist, ultra-marathoner? 不是吗? 财务长、天体物理学家、超级马拉松先生们?

us.(Laughter)You're all CFO, astrophysicists, ultra-marathoners, it turns out.(笑声)结果是你们全成了财务长、天体物理学家、跑超级马拉松 Okay, so fine.那很好

Except that then we freak out at the possibility that we've gotten something wrong.但一旦我们发现有可能犯错 就开始手足无措

Because according to this, getting something wrong means there's something wrong with

因为依照规定 犯错 代表我们一定也有甚么不对劲

So we just insist that we're right, because it makes us feel smart and responsible and virtuous and safe.于是我们坚持己见 因为那让我们感觉聪明、得体 安全和可靠

So let me tell you a story.让我告诉你们一个故事

A couple of years ago, a woman comes into Beth Israel Deaconess medical center for a surgery.几年前 一个女人到 Beth Israel Deaconess 诊所做手术

Beth Israel's in Boston.Beth Israel 在波士顿

It's the teaching hospital for Harvard--one of the best hospitals in the country.是哈佛大学的教学附属医院 全国数一数二的医疗中心

So this woman comes in and she's taken into the operating room.这个女人被送进开刀房

She's anesthetized, the surgeon does his thing--stitches her back up, sends her out to the recovery room.麻醉，外科医生做完手术 缝合，将她送进恢复室

Everything seems to have gone fine.一切看上去都很好

And she wakes up, and she looks down at herself, and she says, “Why is the wrong side of my body in bandages?”

她醒来，往自己身上一看 说“为甚么我的左腿绑着绷带?”

Well the wrong side of her body is in bandages because the surgeon has performed a major operation on her left leg instead of her right one.她应该接受治疗的是右腿 但为他做手术的外科医生 却把刀开在左腿

When the vice president for health care quality at Beth Israel spoke about this incident, he said something very interesting.当副院长出来为医院的医疗质量 和这次意外做出解释时 他说了句很有趣的话

He said, “For whatever reason, the surgeon simply felt that he was on the correct side of the patient.”

他说“无论如何 这位外科医生感觉 他开下的刀是在正确的一侧”

(Laughter)The point of this story is that trusting too much in the feeling of being on the correct side of anything can be very dangerous.(笑声)故事的重点是 相信自己的判断力 相信自己站在对的一边 是非常危险的

This internal sense of rightness that we all experience so often is not a reliable guide to what is actually going on in the external world.我们心中时常感觉到的 理直气壮的感觉 在真实世界中 并不是个可靠的向导。

And when we act like it is, and we stop entertaining the possibility that we could be wrong, well that's when we end up doing things

当我们依此行事 不再思考我们是否犯错 我们就有可能

88.like dumping 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, or torpedoing the global economy.把两百湾加仑的石油倒进墨西哥湾 或是颠覆世界经济

So this is a huge practical problem.这是个很实际的问题

But it's also a huge social problem.这也是个很大的社会问题

Think for a moment about what it means to feel right.“感觉对”究竟是什么意思

It means that you think that your beliefs just perfectly reflect reality.这代表着你认为你的信念 和真实是一致的

And when you feel that way, you've got a problem to solve, which is, how are you going to explain all of those people who disagree with you?

当你有这种感觉的时候 你的问题就大了 因为如果你是对的 为甚么还有人和你持不同意见?

It turns out, most of us explain those people the same way, by resorting to a series of unfortunate assumptions.于是我们往往用同一种 思考方式去解释这些异议

The first thing we usually do when someone disagrees with us is we just assume they're ignorant.第一是当他人不同意我们的说法 我们便觉得他们无知

They don't have access to the same information that we do, and when we generously share that information with them, they're going to see the light and come on over to our team.他们不像我们懂得这么多 当我们慷慨地和他们分享我们的知识 他们便会理解，并加入我们的行列

When that doesn't work, when it turns out those people have all the same facts that we do and they still disagree with us, then we move on to a second assumption，如果不是这样 如果这些人和我们获得的信息一样多 却仍然不认同我们 我们便有了下一个定论

which is that they're idiots.那就是他们是白痴

(Laughter)They have all the right pieces of the puzzle, and they are too moronic to put them together correctly.(笑声)他们已经有了所有的信息 却笨到无法拼凑出正确的图像

And when that doesn't work, when it turns out that people who disagree with us have all the same facts we do and are actually pretty smart，一旦第二个定论也不成立 当这些反对我们的人 和我们有一样的信息 又聪明

then we move on to a third assumption: they know the truth, and they are deliberately distorting it for their own malevolent purposes.我们便有了第三个结论 他们知道事实是甚么 但却为了自己的好处 故意曲解真实。

So this is a catastrophe.这真是个大灾难

This attachment to our own rightness keeps us from preventing mistakes when we absolutely need to and causes us to treat each other terribly.我们的自以为是 让我们在最需要的时候 无法预防犯错 更让我们互相仇视

104.But to me, what's most baffling and most tragic about this is that it misses the whole point of being human.对我来说 最大的悲剧是 它让我们错失了身为人的珍贵意义

It's like we want to imagine that our minds are just these perfectly translucent windows and we just gaze out of them and describe the world as it unfolds.那就像是想象 我们的心灵之窗完全透明 我们向外观看 描述在我们之前展开的世界

And we want everybody else to gaze out of the same window and see the exact same thing.我们想要每个人和我们有一样的窗子 对世界做出一样的观察

That is not true, and if it were, life would be incredibly boring.那不是真的 如果是，人生将会多么无聊

The miracle of your mind isn't that you can see the world as it is.心灵的神奇之处 不在你懂得这个世界是甚么样子

It's that you can see the world as it isn't.而是去理解那些你不懂的地方

We can remember the past, and we can think about the future, and we can imagine what it's like to be some other person in some other place.我们记得过去 思考未来 我们想象 自己成为他人，在他方

And we all do this a little differently, which is why we can all look up at the same night sky and see this and also this and also this.我们的想象都有些不同 于是当我们抬头看同一个夜空 我们看到这个 这个 和这个

And yeah, it is also why we get things wrong.这也是我们搞错事情的原因

1,200 years before Descartes said his famous thing about “I think therefore I am,”

在笛卡儿说出那句有名的”我思故我在“ 的一千两百年前

this guy, St.Augustine, sat down and wrote “Fallor ergo sum”--“I err therefore I am.”

圣奥古斯丁，坐下来 写下“Fallor ergo sum”“我错故我在”

Augustine understood that our capacity to screw up, it's not some kind of embarrassing defect in the human system, something we can eradicate or overcome.奥古斯丁懂得 我们犯错的能力 这并不是人性中 一个令人难堪的缺陷 不是我们可以克服或消灭的

It's totally fundamental to who we are.这是我们的本质

Because, unlike God, we don't really know what's going on out there.因为我们不是上帝 我们不知道我们之外究竟发生了甚么

And unlike all of the other animals, we are obsessed with trying to figure it out.而不同于其它动物的是 我们都疯狂地想找出解答

To me, this obsession is the source and root of all of our productivity and creativity.对我来说 这种寻找的冲动 就是我们生产力和创造力的来源

Last year, for various reasons, I found myself listening to a lot of episodes of the Public Radio show This American Life.因为一些缘故 去年我在广播上 听了很多集的“我们的美国人生”

And so I'm listening and I'm listening, and at some point, I start feeling like all the stories are about being wrong.我听着听着 突然发现 这些故事全和犯错有关

And my first thought was, “I've lost it.我的第一个念头是 “我完了

I've become the crazy wrongness lady.我写书写疯了

I just imagined it everywhere,”

四处都看到有关犯错的幻觉”

which has happened.说真的是这样

But a couple of months later, I actually had a chance to interview Ira Glass, who's the host of the show.但几个月后 我访问了那个广播节目的主持人 Ira Glass

And I mentioned this to him, and he was like, “No actually, that's true.我向他提到这件事 他回答我“事实上

In fact,” he says, “as a staff, we joke that every single episode of our show has the same crypto-theme.你是对的”他说 “我们这些工作人员总是 开玩笑说每集节目之中的 秘密主题都是一样的

And the crypto-theme is: 'I thought this one thing was going to happen and something else happened instead.' And thing is,” says Ira Glass, “we need this.这个秘密主题就是 ”我以为这件事会这样发生 结果其它事情发生了“ 他说”但是，这就是我们需要的

We need these moments of surprise and reversal and wrongness to make these stories work.“

我们需要这些意外 这些颠倒和错误 这些故事才能成立。”

And for the rest of us, audience members, as listeners, as readers, we eat this stuff up.而我们身为观众 听众、读者 我们吸收这些故事

We love things like plot twists and red herrings and surprise endings.我们喜欢故事转折 令人惊讶的结局

When it comes to our stories, we love being wrong.我们喜欢在故事里 看到犯错

But, you know, our stories are like this because our lives are like this.但，故事会这样写 是因为人生就是这样

We think this one thing is going to happen and something else happens instead.我们以为某些事情会这样发生 发生的却是其它事

George Bush thought he was going to invade Iraq, find a bunch of weapons of mass destruction, liberate the people and bring democracy to the Middle East.小布什以为他入侵伊拉克 会找到大规模毁灭性武器 解放中东百姓，为他们带来民主自由

And something else happened instead.但却不是这样

And Hosni Mubarak thought he was going to be dictator of Egypt for the rest of his life, until he got too old or too sick and could pass the reigns of power onto his son.穆巴拉克以为 他到死都会是埃及的独裁者 一直到他年老或卧病 再把他的权力交给下一代

And something else happened instead.但却不是这样

And maybe you thought you were going to grow up and marry your high school sweetheart and move back to your home town and raise a bunch of kids together.或许你想过 你会长大、嫁给你的初恋情人 搬回老家，生一群孩子

And something else happened instead.但却不是这样

And I have to tell you that I thought I was writing an incredibly nerdy book about a subject everybody hates for an audience that would never materialize.我必须说 我以为我写的是一本很冷僻的书 有关一个人人讨厌的主题 为一些从不存在的读者

And something else happened instead.但却不是这样

(Laughter)I mean, this is life.(笑声)我们的人生

For good and for ill, we generate these incredible stories about the world around us, and then the world turns around and astonishes us.无论好坏 我们创造了啦 那包围我们的世界 而世界转过头来，令我们大吃一惊

No offense, but this entire conference is an unbelievable monument to our capacity to get stuff wrong.说真的，这整个会议 充斥着这样难以置信的时刻 我们一次又一次地意识到自己的错误

We just spent and entire week talking about innovations and advancements and improvements, but you know why we need all of those innovations

我们花了整整一周 讨论创新，进步 和改善 你知道我们为甚么需要这些创新

and advancements and improvements?

进步和改善吗?

Because half the stuff that's the most mind-boggling and world altering--TED 1998--eh.因为其中有一半 来自最应该改变世界的 98年的TED 呃

(Laughter)Didn't really work out that way, did it.(笑声)真是出人意料之外啊，不是吗

(Laughter)Where's my jet pack, Chris?

(笑声)我的逃生火箭在哪，Chris?

(Laughter)(Applause)So here we are again.(笑声)(掌声)于是我们又在这里

And that's how it goes.事情就是这样

We come up with another idea.我们重新想出其它点子

We tell another story.我们有了新的故事

We hold another conference.我们开了另一个会议

The theme of this one, as you guys have now heard seven million times, is the rediscovery of wonder.这次的主题是 如果你还没有听到耳朵出油的话 是重新找到想象的力量

And to me, if you really want to rediscover wonder, you need to step outside of that tiny, terrified space of rightness and look around at each other

对我来说 如果你真的想重新找到想象的力量 你需要离开 那个小小的、自我感觉良好的小圈圈 看看彼此

and look out at the vastness and complexity and mystery of the universe and be able to say, “Wow, I don't know.看看宇宙的 广大无垠 复杂神秘 然后真正地说 “哇，我不知道

Maybe I'm wrong.”

或许我错了。”

Thank you.谢谢各位

(Applause)Thank you guys.

第二篇：ted演讲稿 英文

ted演讲稿 英文

欢迎来到聘才网，以下是聘才小编为大家搜索整理的ted演讲稿 英文，欢迎大家阅读。莱温斯基ted演讲稿(英文版)

You're looking at a woman who was publicly silent for a decade.Obviously, that's changed, but only recently.It was several months ago that I gave my very first major public talk at the Forbes 30 Under 30 summit:1,500 brilliant people, all under the age of 30.That meant that in 1998, the oldest among the group were only 14, and the youngest, just four.I joked with them that some might only have heard of me from rap songs.Yes, I'm in rap songs.Almost 40 rap songs.But the night of my speech, a surprising thing happened.At the age of 41, I was hit on by a 27-year-old guy.I know, right? He was charming and I was flattered, and I declined.You know what his unsuccessful pickup line was? He could make me feel 22 again.I realized later that night, I'm probably the only person over 40 who does not want to be 22 again.At the age of 22, I fell in love with my boss, and at the age of 24, I learned the devastating consequences.Can I see a show of hands of anyone here who didn't make a mistake or do something they regretted at 22? Yep.That's what I thought.So like me, at 22, a few of you may have also taken wrong turns and fallen in love with the wrong person, maybe even your boss.Unlike me, though, your boss probably wasn't the president of the United States of America.Of course, life is full of surprises.Not a day goes by that I'm not reminded of my mistake, and I regret that mistake deeply.In 1998, after having been swept up into an improbable romance, I was then swept up into the eye of a political, legal and media maelstrom like we had never seen before.Remember, just a few years earlier,news was consumed from just three places: reading a newspaper or magazine, listening to the radio, or watching television.That was it.But that wasn't my fate.Instead, this scandal was brought to you by the digital revolution.That meant we could access all the information we wanted, when we wanted it, anytime, anywhere, and when the story broke in January 1998, it broke online.It was the first time the traditional news was usurped by the Internet for a major news story, a click that reverberated around the world.What that meant for me personally was that overnight I went from being a completely private figure to a publicly humiliated one worldwide.I was patient zero of losing a personal reputation on a global scale almost instantaneously.This rush to judgment, enabled by technology, led to mobs of virtual stone-throwers.Granted, it was before social media, but people could still comment online, email stories, and, of course, email cruel jokes.News sources plastered photos of me all over to sell newspapers, banner ads online, and to keep people tuned to the TV.Do you recall a particular image of me, say, wearing a beret?

Now, I admit I made mistakes, especially wearing that beret.But the attention and judgment that I received, not the story, but that I personally received, was unprecedented.I was branded as a tramp, tart, slut, whore, bimbo, and, of course, that woman.I was seen by many but actually known by few.And I get it: it was easy to forget that that woman was dimensional, had a soul, and was once unbroken.When this happened to me 17 years ago, there was no name for it.Now we call it cyberbullying(网络欺凌)andonline harassment(网络骚扰).Today, I want to share some of my experience with you, talk about how that experience has helped shape my cultural observations, and how I hope my past experience can lead to a change that results in less suffering for others.In 1998, I lost my reputation and my dignity.I lost almost everything, and I almost lost my life.Let me paint a picture for you.It is September of 1998.I'm sitting in a windowless office room inside the Office of the Independent Counsel underneath humming fluorescent lights.I'm listening to the sound of my voice, my voice on surreptitiously taped phone calls that a supposed friend had made the year before.I'm here because I've been legally required to personally authenticate all 20 hours of taped conversation.For the past eight months, the mysterious content of these tapes has hung like the Sword of Damocles over my head.I mean, who can remember what they said a year ago? Scared and mortified, I listen, listen as I prattle on about the flotsam and jetsam of the day;listen as I confess my love for the president, and, of course, my heartbreak;listen to my sometimes catty, sometimes churlish, sometimes silly self being cruel, unforgiving, uncouth;listen, deeply, deeply ashamed, to the worst version of myself,a self I don't even recognize.A few days later, the Starr Report is released to Congress, and all of those tapes and trans, those stolen words, form a part of it.That people can read the trans is horrific enough, but a few weeks later, the audio tapes are aired on TV, and significant portions made available online.The public humiliation was excruciating.Life was almost unbearable.This was not something that happened with regularity back then in 1998, and by this, I mean the stealing of people's private words, actions, conversations or photos, and then making them public--public without consent, public without context, and public without compassion.Fast forward 12 years to XX, and now social media has been born.The landscape has sadly become much more populated with instances like mine, whether or not someone actually make a mistake, and now it's for both public and private people.The consequences for some have become dire, very dire.I was on the phone with my mom in September of XX, and we were talking about the news of a young college freshman from Rutgers University named Tyler Clementi.Sweet, sensitive, creative Tyler was secretly webcammed by his roommate while being intimate with another man.When the online world learned of this incident, the ridicule and cyberbullying ignited.A few days later, Tyler jumped from the George Washington Bridge to his death.He was 18.My mom was beside herself about what happened to Tyler and his family, and she was gutted with painin a way that I just couldn't quite understand, and then eventually I realized she was reliving 1998, reliving a time when she sat by my bed every night, reliving a time when she made me shower with the bathroom door open, and reliving a time when both of my parents feared that I would be humiliated to death,literally.Today, too many parents haven't had the chance to step in and rescue their loved ones.Too many have learned of their child's suffering and humiliation after it was too late.Tyler's tragic, senseless death was a turning point for me.It served to recontextualize my experiences, and I then began to look at the world of humiliation and bullying around me and see something different.In 1998, we had no way of knowing where this brave new technology called the Internet would take us.Since then, it has connected people in unimaginable ways, joining lost siblings, saving lives, launching revolutions, but the darkness, cyberbullying, and slut-shaming that I experienced had mushroomed.Every day online, people, especially young people who are not developmentally equipped to handle this, are so abused and humiliated that they can't imagine living to the next day, and some, tragically, don't, and there's nothing virtual about that.ChildLine, a nonprofit that's focused on helping young people on various issues,released a staggering statistic late last year: From XX to XX, there was an 87 percent increase in calls and emails related to cyberbullying.A meta-analysis done out of the Netherlands showed that for the first time, cyberbullying was leading to suicidal ideations more significantly than offline bullying.And you know what shocked me, although it shouldn't have, was other research last year that determined humiliation was a more intensely felt emotion than either happiness or even anger.Cruelty to others is nothing new, but online, technologically enhanced shaming is amplified, uncontained, and permanently accessible.The echo of embarrassment used to extend only as far as your family, village, school or community, but now it's the online community too.Millions of people, often anonymously, can stab you with their words, and that's a lot of pain, and there are no perimeters around how many people can publicly observe you and put you in a public stockade.There is a very personal price to public humiliation, and the growth of the Internet has jacked up that price.For nearly two decades now, we have slowly been sowing the seeds of shame and public humiliation in our cultural soil, both on-and offline.Gossip websites, paparazzi, reality programming, politics, news outlets and sometimes hackers all traffic in shame.It's led to desensitization and a permissive environment online which lends itself to trolling, invasion of privacy, and cyberbullying.This shift has created what Professor Nicolaus Mills calls a culture of humiliation.Consider a few prominent examples just from the past six months alone.Snapchat, the service which is used mainly by younger generationsand claims that its messages only have the lifespan of a few seconds.You can imagine the range of content that that gets.A third-party app which Snapchatters use to preserve the lifespan of the messages was hacked, and 100,000 personal conversations, photos, and videos were leaked online to now have a lifespan of forever.Jennifer Lawrence and several other actors had their iCloud accounts hacked, and private, intimate, nude photos were plastered across the Internet without their gossip website had over five million hits for this one story.And what about the Sony Pictures cyberhacking? The documents which received the most attention were private emails that had maximum public embarrassment value.But in this culture of humiliation, there is another kind of price tag attached to public shaming.The price does not measure the cost to the victim, which Tyler and too many others, notably women, minorities,and members of the LGBTQ community have paid, but the price measures the profit of those who prey on them.This invasion of others is a raw material, efficiently and ruthlessly mined, packaged and sold at a profit.A marketplace has emerged where public humiliation is a commodity and shame is an is the money made? Clicks.The more shame, the more clicks.The more clicks, the more advertising dollars.We're in a dangerous cycle.The more we click on this kind of gossip, the more numb we get to the human lives behind it, and the more numb we get, the more we click.All the while, someone is making money off of the back of someone else's suffering.With every click, we make a choice.The more we saturate our culture with public shaming, the more accepted it is, the more we will see behavior like cyberbullying, trolling, some forms of hacking, and online harassment.Why? Because they all have humiliation at their cores.This behavior is a symptom of the culture we've created.Just think about it.Changing behavior begins with evolving beliefs.We've seen that to be true with racism, homophobia, and plenty of other biases, today and in the past.As we've changed beliefs about same-sex marriage, more people have been offered equal freedoms.When we began valuing sustainability, more people began to recycle.So as far as our culture of humiliation goes, what we need is a cultural revolution.Public shaming as a blood sport has to stop, and it's time for an intervention on the Internet and in our culture.The shift begins with something simple, but it's not easy.We need to return to a long-held value of compassion--compassion and empathy.Online, we've got a compassion deficit, an empathy crisis.Researcher Brené Brown said, and I quote, “Shame can't survive empathy.” Shame cannot survive empathy.I've seen some very dark days in my life, and it was the compassion and empathy from my family, friends, professionals, and sometimes even strangers that saved me.Even empathy from one person can make a difference.The theory of minority influence, proposed by social psychologist Serge Moscovici, says that even in small numbers, when there's consistency over time, change can happen.In the online world, we can foster minority influence by becoming upstanders.To become an upstander means instead of bystander apathy, we can post a positive comment for someone or report a bullying situation.Trust me, compassionate comments help abate the negativity.We can also counteract the culture by supporting organizations that deal with these kinds of issues, like the Tyler Clementi Foundation in the , In the , there's Anti-Bullying Pro, and in Australia, there's Project Rockit.We talk a lot about our right to freedom of expression, but we need to talk more about our responsibility to freedom of expression.We all want to be heard, but let's acknowledge the difference between speaking up with intention and speaking up for attention.The Internet is the superhighway for the id, but online, showing empathy to others benefits us all and helps create a safer and better world.We need to communicate online with compassion, consume news with compassion, and click with compassion.Just imagine walking a mile in someone else's headline.I'd like to end on a personal note.In the past nine months, the question I've been asked the most is why.Why now? Why was I sticking my head above the parapet? You can read between the lines in those questions, and the answer has nothing to do with politics.The top note answer was and is because it's time: time to stop tip-toeing around my past;time to stop living a life of opprobrium;and time to take back my narrative.It's also not just about saving myself.Anyone who is suffering from shame and public humiliation needs to know one thing: You can survive it.I know it's hard.It may not be painless, quick or easy, but you can insist on a different ending to your story.Have compassion for yourself.We all deserve compassion, and to live both online and off in a more compassionate world.Thank you for listening.

第三篇：TED演讲稿英文

当工作越来越复杂，给你6个简化守则

Ihave spent the last years, trying to resolve two enigmas: why is productivity so disappointing in all the companies where I work? I have worked with more than 500 companies.Despite all the technological advance

–

computers，IT，communications, telecommunications, the internet.Enigma number two: why is there so little engagement at work? Why do people feel so miserable, even actively disengaged? Disengaged their colleagues.Acting against the interest of their company.Despite all the affiliation events, the celebration, the people initiatives, the leadership development programs to train managers on how to better motivate their teams.At the beginning, I thought there was a chicken and egg issue: because people are less engaged, they are less productive.Or vice versa, because they are less productive, we put more pressure and they are less engaged.But as we were doing our analysis we realized that there was a common root cause to these two issues that relates, in fact, to the basic pillars of management.The way we organize is based on two pillars.The hard—structure, processes, systems.The soft—feeling, sentiments, interpersonal relationship, traits, personality.And whenever a company reorganizes, restructures, reengineers, goes through a cultural transformation program, it chooses these two pillars.Now we try to refine them, we try to combine them.The real issue is – and this is the answer to the two enigmas – these pillar are obsolete.Everything you read in business books is based either two of the other or their combine.They are obsolete.How do they work when you try to use these approaches in front of the new complexity of business? The hard approach, basically is that you start from strategy, requirement, structure, processes，systems，KPIs，scorecards，committees, headquarters, hubs, clusters, you name it.I forgot all the metrics, incentives, committees, middle offices and interfaces.What happens basically on the left, you have more complexity, the new complexity of business.We need quality, cost, reliability, speed.And every time there is a new requirement, we use the same approach.We create dedicated structure processed systems, basically to deal with the new complexity of business.The hard approach creates just complicatedness in the organization.Let’s take an example.An automotive company, the engineering division is a five-dimensional matrix.If you open any cell of the matrix, you find another 20-dimensional matrix.You have Mr.Noise, Mr.Petrol Consumption, Mr.Anti-Collision Propertise.For any new requirement, you have a dedicated function in charge of aligning engineers against the new requirement.What happens when the new requirement emerges? Some years ago, a new requirement appeared on the marketplace: the length of the warranty period.So therefore the requirement is repairability, making cars easy to repair.Otherwise when you bring the car to the garage to fix the light, if you have to remove the engine to access the lights, the car will have to stay one week in the garage instead of two hours, and the warranty budget will explode.So, what was the solution using the hard approach? If repairability is the rew requirement, the solution is to create a new function, Mr.Repairability.And Mr.Repairability creates the repairability process.With a repairability scorecard, with a repairability metric and eventually repairability incentive.That came on top of 25 other KPIs.What percentage of these people is variable compensation? Twenty percent at most, divided by 26 KPIs, repairability makes a difference of 0.8 percent.What difference did it make in their action, their choices to simplify? Zero.But what occurs for zero impact? Mr.Repairability, process, scorecard, evaluation, coordination with the 25 other coordinators to have zero impact.Now, in front of the new complexity of business, the only solution is not drawing box es with reporting lines.It is basically the interplay.How the parts work together.The connection, the interaction, the synapse.It is not skeleton of boxes, it is the nervous system of adaptiveness and intelligence.You know, you could call it cooperation, basically.Whenever people cooperate, they use less resources.In everything.You know, the repairability issue is a cooperation problem.When you design cars, please take into account the need of those who will repair the cars in the after sales garage.When we don’t cooperate we need more time, more equipment, more system, more teams.We need – when procurement, supply chain, manufacturing don’t cooperate we need more stock, more investories, more working capital.Who will pay for that? Shareholder? Customers? No, they will refuse.So who is left? The employees, who have tocompensate through their super individual efforts for the lack of cooperation.Stress, burnout, they are overwhelmed, accidents.No wonder they disengage.How do the hard and the soft try to foster cooperation?

The hard: in banks, when there is problem between the back office and the front office, they don’t cooperate.What is the solution? They create a middle office.What happens one years later? Instead of one problem between the back and front, now have to problems.Between the back and the middle and between the middle and the front.Plus I have to pay for the middle office.The hard approach is unable to foster cooperation.It can only add new boxes, new bones in the skeleton.The soft approach: to make people cooperate, we need to make then like each other.Improve interpersonal feelings, the more people laike each other, the more they will cooperate.It is totally worng.It even counterproductive.Look, at home I have two TVs.Why? Precisely not to have to cooperate with my wife.Not to have to impose tradeoffs to my wife.And why I try not to impose tradeoffs to my wife is precisely because I love my wife.If I didn’t love my wife, one TV would be enough: you will watch my favorite football game, if you are not happy, how is the book or the door? The more we like each other, the more we avoid the real cooperation that would strain our relationships by imposing tough tradeoffs.And we go for a second TV or we escalate the decision above for arbitration.Definitely, these approaches are obsolete.To deal with complexity, to enhance nervous system, we have created what we call the smart simplicity approach based on simple rules.Simple rule number one: understand what others do.What is their real work? We need go beyond the boxes, the job description, beyond the surface of the container, to understand the real content.Me, designer, if I put a wire here, I know that it will mean that we will have to remove the engine to access the lights.Second, you need to reinforce integrators.Integrators are not middle office, they are managers, existing managers that you reinforce so that they have power and interest to make others cooperate.How can you reinforce your managers as integrators? By removing layers.When there are too many layers people are too far from the action.Therefore they need KPIs, metrics, they need poor proxies for reality.They don’t understand reality and they add the complicatedness of metrics, KPIs.By removing rules—the bigger we are, the more we need integrators, therefore the less rules we must have, to give discretionary power to managers.And we do the opposite – the bigger we are, the more rules we create.And we end up with the Encyclopedia Britannica of rules.You need to increase the quanitity of power so that you can empower everybody to use their judgment, their intelligence.You must give more cards to people so that they have the critical mass of cards to take the risk to cooperate, to move out of insulation.Otherwise, they will withdraw.They will disengage.These rules, they come from game theory and organizational sociology.You can increase the shadow of the future.Create feedback loops that expose people to the consequences of their actions.This is what the automotive company did when they saw that Mr.Repairability had no impact.They said the design engineers: now, in the three years, when the new car is launched on the market, you will move to the after sales network, and become in charge of the warranty budget, and if the warranty budget explodes, it will explode in your face.Much more powerful than 0.8 percent variable compensation.You need also to increase reciprocity, by removing the buffers that make us self-sufficient.When you remove these buffers, you hold me by the nose, I hold you by the ear.We will cooperate.Remove the second TV.There are many second TVs at work that don’t create value, they just provide dysfunctional self-sufficiency.You need to reward those who cooperate and blame those who don’t cooperate.The CEO of The Lego Group, JK, has a great way to use it.He say, blame is not for failure, it is for failing to help or ask for help.It changes everything.Suddenly it becomes in my interest to be transparent on my real weakness, my real forecast, because I know I will not be blamed if I fail, but if I fail to help or ask for help.When you do this, it has a lot of implications on organizational design.You stop drawing boxes, dotted lines, full lines;you look at their interplay.It has a lot of implication on financial policies that we use.On human resource management practices.When you do that, you can manage complexity, the new complexity of business, without getting complicated.You create more value with lower cost.You simultaneously improve performance and satisfaction at work because you have remove the common root cause that hinders both.Complicatedness: this is your battle, business leader.The real battle is not against competitors.This is rubbish, very abstract.When do we meet competitors to fight them? The real battle is against ourselves, against our bureaucracy, our complicatedness.Only you can fight, can do it.Thank you!

第四篇：TED励志英文演讲稿

我知道你们在想什么，你们觉得我迷路了，马上就会有人走上台温和地把我带回我的座位上。（掌声）。我在迪拜总会遇上这种事。“来这里度假的吗，亲爱的？”（笑声）“来探望孩子的吗？这次要待多久呢？ 恩，事实上，我希望能再待久一点。我在波斯湾这边生活和教书已经超过30年了。（掌声）这段时间里，我看到了很多变化。现在这份数据是挺吓人的，而我今天要和你们说的是有关语言的消失和英语的全球化。我想和你们谈谈我的朋友，她在阿布达比教成人英语。在一个晴朗的日子里，她决定带她的学生到花园去教他们一些大自然的词汇。但最后却变成是她在学习所有当地植物在阿拉伯语中是怎么说的。还有这些植物是如何被用作药材，化妆品，烹饪，香草。这些学生是怎么得到这些知识的呢？当然是从他们的祖父母，甚至曾祖父母那里得来的。不需要我来告诉你们能够跨代沟通是多么重要。but sadly, today, languages are dying at an unprecedented rate.a language dies every 14 days.now, at the same time, english is the undisputed global language.could there be a connection? well i dont know.but i do know that ive seen a lot of changes.when i first came out to the gulf, i came to kuwait in the days when it was still a hardship post.actually, not that long ago.that is a little bit too early.but nevertheless, i was recruited by the british council along with about 25 other teachers.and we were the first non-muslims to teach in the state schools there in kuwait.we were brought to teach english because the government wanted to modernize the country and empower the citizens through education.and of course, the u.k.benefited from some of that lovely oil wealth.但遗憾的是，今天很多语言正在以前所未有的速度消失。每14天就有一种语言消失，而与此同时，英语却无庸置疑地成为全球性的语言。这其中有关联吗？我不知道。但我知道的是，我见证过许多改变。初次来到海湾地区时，我去了科威特。当时教英文仍然是个困难的工作。其实，没有那么久啦，这有点太久以前了。总之，我和其他25位老师一起被英国文化协会聘用。我们是第一批非穆斯林的老师，在科威特的国立学校任教。我们被派到那里教英语，是因为当地政府希望国家可以现代化并透过教育提升公民的水平。当然，英国也能得到些好处，产油国可是很有钱的。okay.now this is the major change that ive seen--how teaching english has morphed from being a mutually english-speaking nation on earth.and why not? after all, the best education--according to the latest world university rankings--is to be found in the universities of the u.k.and the u.s.so everybody wants to have an english education, naturally.but if youre not a native speaker, you have to pass a test.言归正传，我见过最大的改变，就是英语教学的蜕变如何从一个互惠互利的行为变成今天这种大规模的国际产业。英语不再是学校课程里的外语学科，也不再只是英国的专利。英语（教学）已经成为所有英语系国家追逐的潮流。何乐而不为呢？毕竟，最好的教育来自于最好的大学，而根据最新的世界大学排名，那些名列前茅的都是英国和美国的大学。所以自然每个人都想接受英语教育，但如果你不是以英文为母语，你就要通过考试。now can it be right to reject a student on linguistic ability well, i dont think so.we english teachers reject them all the time.we put a stop sign, and we stop them in their tracks.they cant pursue their dream any longer, till they get english.now let me put it this way, if i met a dutch speaker who had the cure for cancer, would i stop him from entering my british university? i dont think so.but indeed, that is exactly what we do.we english teachers are the gatekeepers.and you have to satisfy us first that your english is good enough.now it can be dangerous to give too much power to a narrow segment of society.maybe the barrier would be too universal.但仅凭语言能力就拒绝学生这样对吗？譬如如果你碰到一位天才计算机科学家，但他会需要有和律师一样的语言能力吗？我不这么认为。但身为英语老师的我们，却总是拒绝他们。我们处处设限，将学生挡在路上，使他们无法再追求自己的梦想，直到他们通过考试。现在容我换一个方式说，如果我遇到了一位只会说荷兰话的人，而这个人能治愈癌症，我会阻止他进入我的英国大学吗？我想不会。但事实上，我们的确在做这种事。我们这些英语老师就是把关的。你必须先让我们满意，使我们认定你的英文够好。但这可能是危险的。把太多的权力交由这么小的一群人把持，也许会令这种障碍太过普及。okay.but, i hear you say, what about the research? its all in english.so the books are in english, the journals are done in english, but that is a self-fulfilling.it feeds the english requirement.and so it goes on.i ask you, what happened to translation? if you think about the islamic golden age, there was lots of translation then.they translated from latin and greek into arabic, into persian, and then it was translated on into the germanic languages of europe and the romance languages.and so light shone upon the dark ages of europe.now dont get me wrong;i am not against teaching english, all you english teachers out there.i love it that we have a global language.we need one today more than ever.but i am against using it as a barrier.do we really want to end up with 600 languages and the main one being english, or chinese? we need more than that.where do we draw the line? this system equates intelligence with a knowledge of english which is quite.于是，我听到你们问但是研究呢?研究报告都要用英文。”的确，研究论著和期刊都要用英文发表，但这只是一种理所当然的现象。有英语要求，自然就有英语供给，然后就这么循环下去。我倒想问问大家，为什么不用翻译呢？想想伊斯兰的黄金时代，当时翻译盛行，人们把拉丁文和希腊文翻译成阿拉伯文或波斯文，然后再由拉伯文或波斯文翻译为欧洲的日耳曼语言以及罗曼语言。于是文明照亮了欧洲的黑暗时代。但不要误会我的意思，我不是反对英语教学或是在座所有的英语老师。我很高兴我们有一个全球性的语言，这在今日尤为重要。但我反对用英语设立障碍。难道我们真希望世界上只剩下600种语言，其中又以英文或中文为主流吗？我们需要的不只如此。那么我们该如何拿捏呢？这个体制把智能和英语能力画上等号这是相当武断的。

and i want to remind you that the giants upon whose shoulders todays stand did not have to have english, they didnt have to pass an english test.case in point, einstein.he, by the way, was considered remedial at school because he was, in fact, dyslexic.but fortunately for the world, he did not have to pass an english test.because they didnt start until 1964 with toefl, the american test of english.now its exploded.there are lots and lots of tests of english.and millions and millions of students take these tests every year.now you might think, you and me, those fees arent bad, theyre okay, but they are prohibitive to so many millions of poor people.so immediately, were rejecting them.我想要提醒你们，扶持当代知识分子的这些“巨人肩膀不必非得具有英文能力，他们不需要通过英语考试。爱因斯坦就是典型的例子。顺便说一下，他在学校还曾被认为需要课外补习，因为他其实有阅读障碍。但对整个世界来说,很幸运的当时他不需要通过英语考试，因为他们直到1964年才开始使用托福。现在英语测验太泛滥了，有太多太多的英语测验，以及成千上万的学生每年都在参加这些考试。现在你会认为，你和我都这么想，这些费用不贵，价钱满合理的。但是对数百万的穷人来说，这些费用高不可攀。所以，当下我们又拒绝了他们。it brings to mind a headline i saw recently: education: the great divide.now i get it, i understand why people would focus on english.they want to give their children the best chance in life.and to do that, they need a western education.because, of course, the best jobs go to people out of the western universities, that i put on earlier.its a circular thing.这使我想起最近看到的一个新闻标题：“教育：大鸿沟”现在我懂了。我了解为什么大家都重视英语，因为他们希望给孩子最好的人生机会。为了达成这目的，他们需要西方教育。毕竟，不可否认，最好的工作都留给那些西方大学毕业出来的人。就像我之前说的，这是一种循环。

okay.let me tell you a story about two scientists, two english scientists.they were doing an experiment to do with genetics and the forelimbs and the hind limbs of animals.but they couldnt get the results they wanted.they really didnt know what to do, until along came a german scientist who realized that they were using two words for forelimb and hind limb, whereas genetics does not differentiate and neither does german.so bingo, problem solved.if you cant think a thought, you are stuck.but if another language can think that thought, then, by cooperating, we can achieve and learn so much more.好，我跟你们说一个关于两位科学家的故事：有两位英国科学家在做一项实验，是关于遗传学的，以及动物的前、后肢。但他们无法得到他们想要的结果。他们真的不知道该怎么办，直到来了一位德国的科学家。他发现在英文里前肢和后肢是不同的二个字，但在遗传学上没有区别。在德语也是同一个字。所以，叮！问题解决了。如果你不能想到一个念头，你会卡在那里。但如果另一个语言能想到那念头，然后通过合作我们可以达成目的，也学到更多。我的女儿从科威特来到英格兰，她在阿拉伯的学校学习科学和数学。那是所阿拉伯中学。在学校里，她得把这些知识翻译成英文，而她在班上却能在这些学科上拿到最好的成绩。这告诉我们，当外籍学生来找我们，我们可能无法针对他们所知道的给予赞赏，因为那是来自于他们母语的知识。当一个语言消失时，我们不知道还有什么也会一并失去。this is--i dont know if you saw it on cnn recently--they gave the heroes award to a young kenyan shepherd boy who couldnt study at night in his village like all the village children,篇二：杨澜ted演讲稿中英文 yang lan: the generation thats remaking china the night before i was heading for scotland, i was invited to host the final of chinas got talent show in shanghai with the 80,000 live audience in the stadium.guess who was the performing guest?susan boyle.and i told her, im going to scotland the next day.she sang beautifully, and she even managed to say a few words in chinese.[chinese]so its not like hello or thank you, that ordinary stuff.it means green onion for free.why did she say that? because it was a line from our chinese parallel susan boyle--a 50-some year-old woman, a vegetable vendor in shanghai, who loves singing western opera, but she didnt understand any english or french or italian, so she managed to fill in the lyrics with vegetable names in chinese.(laughter)and the last sentence of nessun dorma that she was singing in the stadium was green onion for free.so [as] susan boyle was saying that, 80,000 live audience sang together.that was hilarious.so i guess both susan boyle and this vegetable vendor in shanghai belonged to otherness.they were the least expected to be successful in the business called entertainment, yet their courage and talent brought them through.and a show and a platform gave them the stage to realize their dreams.well, being different is not that difficult.we are all different from different perspectives.but i think being different is good, because you present a different point of view.you may have the chance to make a difference.my generation has been very fortunate to witness and participate in the historic transformation of china that has made so many changes in the past 20, 30 years.i remember that in the year of 1990,when i was graduating from college, i was applying for a job in the sales department of the first five-star hotel in beijing, great wall sheraton--its still there.so after being interrogated by this japanese manager for a half an hour, he finally said, so, miss yang, do you have any questions to ask me?i summoned my courage and poise and said,yes, but could you let me know, what actually do you sell? i didnt have a clue what a sales department was about in a five-star hotel.that was the first day i set my foot in a five-star hotel.my life, and i feel proud of that.but then we are also so fortunate to witness the transformation of the whole country.i was in beijings bidding for the olympic games.i was representing the shanghai expo.i saw china embracing the world and vice versa.but then sometimes im thinking, what are todays young generation up to? how are they different, and what are the differences they are going to make to shape the future of china, or at large, the world? so making a living is not that easy for young people.college graduates are not in short supply.in urban areas, college graduates find the starting salary is about 400 u.s.dollars a month, while the average rent is above $500.so what do they do? they have to share space--squeezed in very limited space to save money--and they call themselves tribe of ants.and for those who are ready to get married and buy their apartment, they figured out they have to work for 30 to 40 years to afford their first apartment.that ratio in americawould only cost a couple five years to earn, but in china its 30 to 40 years with the skyrocketing real estate price.so through some of the hottest topics on microblogging, we can see what young people care most about.social justice and government accountability runs the first in what they demand.for the past decade or so, a massive urbanization and development have let us witness a lot of reports on the forced demolition of private property.and it has aroused huge anger and frustrationamong our young generation.sometimes people get killed, and sometimes people set themselves on fire to protest.so when these incidents are reported more and more frequently on the internet,people cry for the government to take actions to stop this.so the good news is that earlier this year, the state council passed a new regulation on house requisition and demolition and passed the right to order forced demolition from local governments to the court.similarly, many other issues concerning public safety is a hot topic on the internet.we heard about polluted air, polluted water, poisoned food.and guess what, we have faked beef.they have sorts of ingredients that you brush on a piece of chicken or fish, and it turns it to look like beef.and then lately, people are very concerned about cooking oil, because thousands of people have been found [refining] cooking oil from restaurant slop.so all these things have aroused a huge outcry from the internet.and fortunately, we have seen the government responding more timely and also more frequently to the public concerns.while young people seem to be very sure about their participation in public policy-making, but sometimes theyre a little bit lost in terms of what they want for their personal life.china is soon to pass the u.s.as the number one market for luxury brands--thats not including the chinese expenditures in europe and elsewhere.but you know what, half of those consumers are earning a salary below 2,000 u.s.dollars.theyre not rich at all.theyre taking those bags and clothes as a sense of identity and social status.and this is a girl explicitly saying on a tv dating show that she would rather cry in a bmw than smile on a bicycle.but of course, we do have young people who would still prefer to smile, whether in a bmw or [on] a bicycle.so happiness is the most popular word we have heard through the past two years.happiness is not only related to personal experiences and personal values, but also, its about the environment.people are thinking about the following questions: are we going to sacrifice our environment further to produce higher gdp? how are we going to perform our social and political reform to keep pace with economic growth, to keep sustainability and stability? and also, how capable is the systemof self-correctness to keep more people contentwith all sorts of friction going on at the same time?i guess these are the questions people are going to answer.and our younger generation are going to transform this country while at the same time being transformed themselves.thank you very much.杨澜ted演讲：重塑中国的一代 中文演讲稿

在来爱尔兰的前一晚，我应邀主持了中国达人秀在上海的体育场和八万现场观众。猜猜谁是表演嘉宾？——苏珊大妈。我告诉她，“我明天要去爱尔兰了。” 她歌声犹如天籁。而且她还可以说点中文。

“送你葱。” 这不是“你好、谢谢”之类的日常用语。这组词翻译过来是免费给你青葱，为什么她要说这个呢？因为这是我们中国版的苏珊大妈很有名的一句歌词。

这位五十几岁的大妈在上海以贩卖蔬菜为生。她喜欢西方的歌剧，但是她不懂任何外语，所以她就把中文蔬菜名填做歌词。当她在体育场里 唱到今夜无人入眠的最后一句时，她唱的是“送你葱”。苏珊大妈和全场八万观众一起唱“送你葱”，多有意思的场面。我想苏珊大妈和这位在上海做蔬菜买卖的都属于不同寻常的人。在业界所谓的娱乐圈，他们最不可能取得成功，但是他们的勇气和才华让他们成功了。一场秀，一个平台给了他们实现梦想的舞台。与众不同不难，从不同的角度看我们都是不一样的。我认为与众不同是好的，因为你有不同的看法，这给你机会去产生不同的影响。我们这代人有幸见证和参与了过去二三十年中国的历史性的转型。

我记得在九十年代，刚从大学毕业的我申请了一份在北京五星级酒店销售部的工作。在日本经理一个半小时的面试后，他最后说：“杨小姐，你有什么问题要问我吗？”我鼓起勇气，定定神然后问道：“您能告诉我销售部到底销售什么？”我对于五星级酒店的销售部的职责一点都摸不着头脑。那是我在五星级酒店的第一天。

同时，我和上千名大学女生参加了一场由中国中央电视台举办的史无前例的公开选拔。制作人告诉我们他们想找一位可爱，天真，美丽的新面孔。当轮到我时，我站起来说道，“为什么女孩在电视上必须是漂亮，甜美，无邪的，像个花瓶？为什么她们不能有她们的想法，她们自己的声音？”

我想我一定得罪了评委。但是事实上，我的发言给他们留下了深刻的印象。接下来我进入了第二轮的选拔，然后是第三轮，第四轮。在经过七轮的选拔后，我胜出了。成为了一个国家电视台黄金时段节目的主持人。

不管你们相不相信，那是中国电视上第一个节目可以允许主持人自由发挥而不是去读审查后的稿子。这个节目的观众人数高达两到三千万。

几年后，我决定去美国哥伦比亚大学进修。之后我有了自己的传媒公司，这是在我刚毕业的时候想都不敢想的。

我和我的团队做了很多事情。在过去的这些年，我采访了上千人。有时候有年轻人走过来对我说：“杨澜，你改变了我的生活。”我也为此而自豪。

今天我想讲讲在社交媒体这个大舞台上的年轻人 matt cutts ted中英文对照双语演讲稿 try something new for 30 days 小计划帮你实现大目标

——google工程师matt cutts在ted的励志演讲稿 a few years ago, i felt like i was stuck in a rut, so i decided to follow in the footsteps of the great american philosopher, morgan spurlock, and try something new for 30 days.the idea is actually pretty simple.think about something you’ve always wanted to add to your life and try it for the next 30 days.it turns out, 30 days is just about the right amount of time to add a new habit or subtract a habit — like watching the news — from your life.几年前，我感觉对老一套感到枯燥乏味，所以我决定追随伟大的美国哲学家摩根·斯普尔洛克的脚步，尝试做新事情30天。这个想法的确是非常简单。考虑下，你常想在你生命中做的一些事情 接下来30天尝试做这些。这就是，30天刚好是这么一段合适的时间 去养成一个新的习惯或者改掉一个习惯——例如看新闻——在你生活中。当我在30天做这些挑战性事情时，我学到以下一些事。第一件事是，取代了飞逝而过易被遗忘的岁月的是 这段时间非常的更加令人难忘。挑战的一部分是要一个月内每天我要去拍摄一张照片。我清楚地记得那一天我所处的位置我都在干什么。我也注意到随着我开始做更多的，更难的30天里具有挑战性的事时，我自信心也增强了。我从一个台式计算机宅男极客变成了一个爱骑自行车去工作的人——为了玩乐。甚至去年，我完成了在非洲最高山峰乞力马扎罗山的远足。在我开始这30天做挑战性的事之前我从来没有这样热爱冒险过。

我也认识到如果你真想一些槽糕透顶的事，你可以在30天里做这些事。你曾想写小说吗？每年11月，数以万计的人们在30天里，从零起点尝试写他们自己的5万字小说。这结果就是，你所要去做的事就是每天写1667个字要写一个月。所以我做到了。顺便说一下，秘密在于除非在一天里你已经写完了1667个字，要不你就甭想睡觉。你可能被剥夺睡眠，但你将会完成你的小说。那么我写的书会是下一部伟大的美国小说吗？不是的。我在一个月内写完它。它看上去太可怕了。但在我的余生，如果我在一个ted聚会上遇见约翰·霍奇曼，我不必开口说，“我是一个电脑科学家。”不，不会的，如果我愿意我可以说，“我是一个小说家。” so here’s one last thing i’d like to mention.i learned that when i made small, sustainable changes, things i could keep doing, they were more likely to stick.there’s nothing wrong with big, crazy challenges.in fact, they’re a ton of fun.but they’re less likely to stick.when i gave up sugar for 30 days, day 31 looked like this.我这儿想提的最后一件事。当我做些小的、持续性的变化，我可以不断尝试做的事时，我学到我可以把它们更容易地坚持做下来。这和又大又疯狂的具有挑战性的事情无关。事实上，它们的乐趣无穷。但是，它们就不太可能坚持做下来。当我在30天里拒绝吃糖果，31天后看上去就像这样。so here’s my question to you: what are you waiting for? i guarantee you the next 30 days are going to pass whether you like it or not, so why not think about something you have always wanted to try and give it a shot for the next 30 days.所以我给大家提的问题是：大家还在等什么呀？我保准大家在未来的30天定会经历你喜欢或者不喜欢的事，那么为什么不考虑一些你常想做的尝试并在未来30天里试试给自己一个机会。thanks.谢谢。matt cutts简介： matt cutts是google所有工程师中最广为人知的一个，因为他几乎每天都在自己的blog上面和读者们分享与google相关的一切信息，包括技术与非技术类。matt写的文章深入浅出，简明易懂，实用价值很高，因此他在互联网上具有相当高的名气。简言之，matt cutts是google的anti-spam之王。

第五篇：李世默TED演讲稿(英文)

Good morning.My name is Eric Li, and I was born here.But no, I wasn’t born there.This was where I was born: Shanghai, at the height of the Cultural Revolution.My grandmother tells me that she heard the sound of gunfire along with my first cries.When I was growing up, I was told a story that explained all I ever needed to know that humanity.It went like this.All human societies develop in linear progression, beginning with primitive society, then slave society, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and finally, guess where we end up? Communism!Sooner or later, all of humanity, regardless of culture, language, nationality, will arrive at this final stage of political and social development.The entire world’s peoples will be unified in this paradise on earth and live happily ever after.But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil, the good of socialism against the evil of capitalism, and the good shall triumph.That, of course, was the meta-narrative distilled from the theories of Karl Marx.And the Chinese bought it.We were taught that grand story day in and day out.It became part of us, and we believed in it.The story was a bestseller.About on third of the entire world’s population lived under that meta narrative.Then, the world changed overnight.As for me, disillusioned by the failed religion of my youth, I went to America and became a Berkeley hippie.Now, as I was coming of age, something else happened.As if one big story wasn’t enough, I was told another one.This one was just as grand.It also claims that all human societies develop in a linear progression towards a singular end.This one went as follows.All societies, regardless of culture, be it Christian, Muslim, Confucian, must progress from traditional societies in which groups are the basic units to modern societies in which atomized individuals are the sovereign units, and all these individuals are, by definition, rational, and they all want one thing: the vote.Because they all rational, once given the vote, they produce good government and live happily ever after.Paradise on earth, again.Sooner or later, electoral democracy will be the only political system for all countries and all peoples, with a free market to make them all rich.But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil.The good belongs to those who are democracies and are charged with a mission of spreading it around the globe, sometimes by force, against the evil of those who do not hold elections.Now.This story also became a bestseller.According to the Freedom House, the number of democracies went from 45 in 1970 to 115 in 2010.In the last 20years, Western elites tirelessly trotted around the globe selling this prospectus: multiple parties fight for political power and everyone voting on them is the only path to salvation to the long-suffering developing world.Those who buy the prospectus are destined for success.Those who do not are doomed to fail.But this time, the Chinese didn’t buy it.Fool me once… The rest is history.In just 3p years, China went from one of the poorest agricultural countries in the world to its second-largest economy.Six hundred fifty million people were lifted out of poverty.Eighty percent of the entire world’s poverty alleviation during that period happened in China.In other words, all the new and old democracies put together amounted to a mere fraction of what a single, one-party state did without voting.See, I grew up on this stuff: food stamps.Meat was rationed to a few hundred grams per person per month at one point.Needless to say, I ate my grandmother’s portions.So I asked myself, what’s wrong with this picture? Here I am in my hometown, my business growing leaps and bounds.Entrepreneurs are starting companies every day.Middle class is expanding in speed and scale unprecedented in human history.Yet, according to the grand story, none of this should be happening.So I went and did the only thing I could.I studied it.Yes, China is a one-party state run by the Chinese Communist Party, the Party, and they don’t hold elections.There assumptions are made by the dominant political theories of our time.Such a system is operationally rigid, politically closed, and morally illegitimate.Well, the assumptions are wrong.The opposites are true.Adaptability, meritocracy, and legitimacy are the three defining characteristics of China’s one-party system.Now, most political scientists will tell us that a one-party system is inherently incapable of self-correction.It won’t last long because it cannot adapt.Now here are the facts.In 64 years of running the largest country in the world, the range of the party’s policies has been wider than any other country in recent memory, from radical land collectivization to the Great Leap Forward, then privatization of farmland, then the Cultural Revolution, then Deng Xiaoping’s market reform, then successor Jiang Zemin took the giant political step of opening up party membership to private businesspeople, something unimaginable during Mao’s rule.So the party self-corrects in rather dramatic fashions.Institutionally, new rules get enacted to correct previous dysfunctions.For example, term limits.Political leaders used to retain their positions for life, and they used that to accumulate power and perpetuate their rules.Mao was the father of modern China, yet his prolonged rule led to disastrous mistakes.So the party instituted term limits with mandatory retirement age of 68 to 70.One thing we often hear is political reforms have lagged far behind economic reforms and China is in dire need of political reform.But this claim is a rhetorical trap hidden behind a political bias.See, some have decided a priori what kinds of changes they want to see, and only such changes can be called political reform.The truth is, political reforms have never stopped.Compared with 30 years ago, 20 years, even 10 years ago, every aspect of Chinese society, how the country is governed, from the most local level to the highest center, are unrecognizable today.Now such changes are simply not possible without political reforms of the most fundamental kind.Now I would venture to suggest the Party is the world’s leading expert in political reform.The second assumption is that in a one-party state, power gets concentrated in the hands of the few, and bad governance and corruption follow.Indeed, corruption is a big problem, but let’s first look at the larger context.Now, this maybe be counterintuitive to you.The party happens to be one of the most meritocratic political institutions in the world today.China’s highest ruling body, the Politburo, has 25 members.In the most recent one, only five of them came from a background of privilege, so-called Princelings.The other 20, including the President and the Premier, came from entirely ordinary backgrounds.In the larger central committee of 300 or more, the percentage of those who were born into power and wealth was even smaller.The vast majority of senior Chinese leaders worked and competed their way to the top.Compare that with the ruling elites in both developed and developing countries, I think you’ll find the Party being near the top in upward mobility.The question then is, how could that be possible in a system run by one party? New we come to a powerful political institution, little-known to Westerners: the Party’s Organization Department.The Department functions like a giant human resource engine that would be the envy of even some of the most successful corporations.It operates a rotation pyramid made up of there components: civil service, state-owned enterprises, and social organizations like a university or a community program.The form separate yet integrated career paths for Chinese officials.They recruit college grads into entry-level positions in all three tracks, and they start from the bottom, called Keyuan Then they could get promoted through four increasingly elite ranks: fuke, ke, fuchu, and chu.Now these are not moves from karate kids, okay? It’s serious business.The range of positions is wide, from running health care in a village to foreign investment in a city district to manager in a company.Once a year, the department reviews their performance.They interview their superiors, their peers, their subordinates.They vet their personal conduct.They conduct public opinion surveys.Then they promote the winners.Throughout their careers, these cadres can move through and out of all three tracks.Over time, the food ones move beyond the four base levels to the fuju and ju, levels.There, they enter high, officialdom.By that point, a typical assignment will be to manage a district with population in the millions or a company with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue.Just to show you how competitive the system is, in 2012, there were 900000 fuke and ke levels, 600000 fuchu and chu levels, and only 40000 fuju and ju levels.After the ju levels, the best few move further up several more ranks, and eventually make it to the Central Committee.The process takes two to three decades.Does patronage play a role? Yes of course.But merit remains the fundamental driver.In essence, the Organization Department runs a modernizes version of China’s centuries-old mandarin system.China’s new President Xi Jinping is son of a former leader, which is very unusual, first of his kind to make the top job.Even for him, the career took 30 years.He started as a village manager, and by the time he entered the Politburo, he had managed areas with total population of 150 million people and combined GDPs of 1.5 trillion U.S.dollars.Now, please don’t get me wrong, okay? This is not a putdown of anyone.It’s just a statement of fact.George W.Bush, remember him? This is not a putdown.Before becoming Governor of Texas, or Barack Obama before running for President, could not make even a small county manager in China’s system.Winston Churchill once said that democracy is a terrible system except for all the rest.Well, apparently he hadn’t heard of the Organization Department.Now, Westerners always assume that multi-party election with universal suffrage is the only source of political legitimacy.I was asked once, “The Party wasn’t voted in by election.Where is the source of Legitimacy?” I said, “How about competency?”: We all know the facts.In 1949, when the Party took power, China was mired in civil wars, dismembered by foreign aggression, average life expectancy at that time, 42 years old.Today, it’s the second largest economy in the world, an industrial powerhouse, and its people live in increasing prosperity.Pew Research polls Chinese public attitudes, and here are the numbers in recent years.Satisfaction with the direction of the country: 85 percent.Those who think they’re better off than five years ago, 70%.Those who expects the future to be better, a whopping 82 percent.Financial Times polls global youth attitudes and these numbers, brand new, just came from last week.Ninety-three-percent of China’s GenerationY are optimistic about their country’s future.Now, if this is not legitimacy, I’m not sure what is.In contrast, most electoral democracies around the world are suffering from dismal performance.I don’t need to elaborate for this audience how dysfunctional it is from Washington to European capitals.With a few exceptions, the vast number of developing countries that have adopted electoral regimes are still suffering from poverty and civil strife.Governments get elected, and then they fall below 50 percent approval in a few months and stay there and get worse until the next election.Democracy is becoming a perpetual cycle of elect and regret.At this rate, I’m afraid it is democracy, not China’s one-party system, that is in danger of losing legitimacy.Now, I don’t want to create the misimpression that China’s hunky-dory on the way to some kind of superpowerdom.The country faces enormous challenges.Social and economic problems that come with wrenching change like this are mine-boggling.Pollution is one.Food safety.Population issues.On the political front, the worst problem is corruption.Corruption is widespread and undermines the system and its moral legitimacy.But most analysts mis-diagnose the disease.They say that corruption is the result of the one-party system, and therefore, in order to cure it, you have to do away with the entire system.But a more careful look would tell us otherwise.Transparency International ranks China between 70 and 80 in recent years among 170 countries, and it’s been moving up.India, the largest democracy in the world, 94 and dropping.For the hundred or so countries that are ranked below China, more than half of them are electoral democracies.So if election is the panacea for corruption, how come these countries can’t fix it? Now, I’m a venture capitalist.I make bets.It wouldn’t be fair to end this talk without putting myself on the line and making some predictions.So here they are.In the next 10 years, China will surpass the U.S.and become the largest economy in the world.Income per capital will be near the top of all developing countries.Corruption will be curbed, but not eliminated, and China will move up 10 to 20 notches to above 60 in T.I.ranking.Economic reform will accelerate, political reform will continue, and the one-party system will hold firm.We live in the dusk of an era.Meta-narratives that make universal claims failed us in the 20th century and are failing us in the 21st.Meta-narrative is the cancer that is killing democracy from the inside.Now, I want to clarify something.I’m not here to make an indictment of democracy.On the contrary, I think democracy contributed to the rise of the West and the creation of the modern world.It is the universal claim that many Western elites are making about their political system, the hubris, that is at the heart of the West’s current ills.If they would spend just a little less time on trying to force their way onto others, and a little bit more on political reform at home, they might give their democracy a better chance.China’s political model will never supplant electoral democracy, because unlike the latter, it doesn’t pretend to be universal.It cannot be exported.But that is the point precisely.The significance of China’s example is not that it provides and alternative but the demonstration that alternatives exist.Let us draw to a close this era of meta-narratives.Communism and democracy may both be laudable ideals, but the era of their dogmatic universalism is over.Let us stop telling people and our children there’s only one way to govern ourselves and a singular future towards which all societies must evolve.It is wrong.It is irresponsible.And worst of all, it is boring.Let universality make way for plurality.Perhaps a more interesting age is upon us.Are we brave enough to welcome it?