section 3
This commit is contained in:
olOwOlo
GitHub
parent
bd0d2971bd
commit
5dcedf3176
126
zh-CN.html
126
zh-CN.html
|
|
@ -525,155 +525,131 @@ Also, <b></b> bolds a word/phrase, and <i></i> italicizes a word/phrase.
|
|||
|
||||
<words id="complex_complex">
|
||||
|
||||
Let's bring back "thresholds" and the binge-drinking <icon name="yellow"></icon> example!
|
||||
When you played with this the first time, people didn't change their behavior.
|
||||
让我们回忆起“临界值”和酗酒者 <icon name="yellow"></icon> 的例子！当你第一次玩这个游戏时，人们并没有改变他们的行为。
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
Now, let's simulate what happens if people start drinking
|
||||
<i>when 50%+ of their friends do!</i>
|
||||
<b>Before you start the sim, ask yourself what you think <i>should</i> happen.</b>
|
||||
现在，让我们来模拟<i>当有 50% 以上的朋友开始饮酒时</i>，人们也会开始饮酒，这时会发生什么！
|
||||
<b>在开始模拟之前，问问自己你认为<i>应该</i> 会发生什么。</b>
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
<b>Now, run the sim, and see what actually happens! <div class="rarr"></div> </b>
|
||||
<b>现在，运行模拟，看看实际发生了什么！ <div class="rarr"></div> </b>
|
||||
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_complex_2">
|
||||
<span style="line-height:1.3em; display:block;">
|
||||
|
||||
Unlike our earlier "fake news" <icon name="red"></icon> contagion,
|
||||
this contagion <icon name="yellow"></icon> does <i>not</i> spread to everyone!
|
||||
The first few people get "infected", because although they're only exposed to one
|
||||
binge-drinker, that binge-drinker is 50% of their friends. (yeah, they're lonely)
|
||||
In contrast, the person near the end of the chain did <i>not</i> get "infected",
|
||||
because while they were exposed to a binge-drinking friend,
|
||||
they did not pass the 50%+ threshold.
|
||||
|
||||
与我们之前的“假新闻” <icon name="red"></icon> 传播不同，这种传播 <icon name="yellow"></icon>
|
||||
并<i>没有</i> 扩散给每个人！前几个人受到“感染”是因为虽然他们只暴露于一位酗酒者，
|
||||
但这位酗酒者却占了他们朋友总数的 50%。（是的，他们的朋友很少）
|
||||
相比之下，接近尾部的人<i>没有</i> 受到“感染”，因为当他们暴露于酗酒者时，并没有达到 50% 这个临界值。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="height:0.75em"></div>
|
||||
|
||||
The <i>relative</i> % of "infected" friends matters.
|
||||
<i>That's</i> the difference between the <b>complex contagion</b> theory<ref id="complex"></ref>,
|
||||
and our naive it-spreads-like-a-virus <b>simple contagion</b> theory.
|
||||
(you could say "simple contagions" are just contagions with a "more than 0%" infection threshold)
|
||||
“受感染”朋友的<i>相对</i> 百分比很重要。
|
||||
<i>这是</i> <b>复杂传播（complex contagion）</b>理论 <ref id="complex"></ref>
|
||||
和我们天真的“它传播的就像病毒”的<b>简单传播（simple contagion）</b>理论之间的区别。
|
||||
（你可以说“简单传播”只是一种感染临界值为 0% 的传播）
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="height:0.75em"></div>
|
||||
|
||||
However, contagions aren't necessarily bad —
|
||||
so enough about crowd <i>madness</i>, what about...
|
||||
<next>...crowd <i>wisdom?</i></next>
|
||||
然而，传播并不一定是糟糕的 —
|
||||
关于群体的<i>愚蠢</i> 已经介绍了很多了，那么...
|
||||
<next>...群体的<i>智慧？</i> </next>
|
||||
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_complex_3">
|
||||
|
||||
Here, we have a person <icon name="blue"></icon> who volunteers to... I don't know,
|
||||
rescue people in hurricanes, or tutor underprivileged kids in their local community, or something cool like that.
|
||||
Point is, it's a "good" complex contagion.
|
||||
This time, though, let's say the threshold is only 25% —
|
||||
people are willing to volunteer, but only if 25% or more of their friends do so, too.
|
||||
Hey, goodwill needs a bit of social encouragement.
|
||||
现在，我们有一个小蓝人 <icon name="blue"></icon> 立志于...救民于天灾，在贫困地区支教，或者一些类似于拯救世界这样的事。
|
||||
关键是，这是一个“好”的传播。但是，这一次我们假设临界值只有 25% —
|
||||
只要有 25% 以上的朋友这样做，人们也会愿意做这样的志愿者。
|
||||
嗨，善意需要一些社会的鼓励。
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
<b>← Get everyone "infected" with the good vibes!</b>
|
||||
<b>← 让每个人被好的氛围“感染”！</b>
|
||||
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_complex_3_end">
|
||||
<span style="line-height:1.3em; display:block;">
|
||||
|
||||
<b>NOTE:</b> Volunteering is just <i>one</i> of many complex contagions!
|
||||
Others include: voter turnout, lifestyle habits,
|
||||
challenging your beliefs,
|
||||
taking time to understand a issue deeply — anything
|
||||
that needs more than one "exposure".
|
||||
Complex contagions aren't <i>necessarily</i> wise,
|
||||
but being wise is a complex contagion.
|
||||
<b>注意：</b>志愿行为只是众多复杂传播中的其中<i>一</i> 种！
|
||||
其他还包括：选民投票率，生活习惯，挑战你的信仰，花时间深入了解一个问题 — 任何需要超过一次被“暴露”的事情。
|
||||
复杂传播<i>不一定</i> 是理智的，但理智的传播一定是复杂传播。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="height:0.75em"></div>
|
||||
|
||||
(So what's a real-life <i>simple</i> contagion?
|
||||
Usually bits of trivia, like, "the possum has 13 nipples"<ref id="possum"></ref>)
|
||||
（那么什么是现实生活中的<i>简单</i> 传播？通常是一些花边新闻，比如“负鼠有 13 个乳头”<ref id="possum"></ref>）
|
||||
|
||||
<bon id="contagions"></bon>
|
||||
|
||||
Now, to <i>really</i> show the power and weirdness of complex contagions, let's revisit...
|
||||
现在，为了<i>真正</i> 展现复杂传播的力量和古怪，让我们重温...
|
||||
|
||||
<next>...an earlier puzzle <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
<next>...之前的谜题 <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_cascade">
|
||||
Remember this? This time, with a <i>complex</i> contagion <icon name="blue"></icon>, it'll be a bit tougher...
|
||||
还记得这个吗？这次，伴随着<i>复杂</i> 传播 <icon name="blue"></icon>，它会变得更加艰难。
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
<b>Try to "infect" everyone with complex wisdom! <div class="darr"></div></b>
|
||||
<b>试着在复杂传播下“感染”每一个人！<div class="darr"></div> </b>
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_cascade_feel_free">
|
||||
(feel free to just hit 'start' and <i>try</i> as many solutions as you want)
|
||||
（随意点击‘开始’，如你所想的<i>尝试</i> 多种解法）
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_cascade_end">
|
||||
<next wiggle>HOT DANG <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
<next wiggle>棒极了 <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_post_cascade">
|
||||
Now, you may think that you just need to keep adding connections to spread any contagion,
|
||||
"complex" or "simple", good or bad, wise or mad.
|
||||
But is that really so? Well, let's revisit...
|
||||
现在，你可能会认为你只需要不断增加连接就可以扩散任何“复杂”或“简单”，好或坏，理智或疯狂的传播。
|
||||
但是，真的如此吗？好的，让我们重温...
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
<words id="complex_post_cascade_end">
|
||||
<next wiggle>...another earlier puzzle <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
<next wiggle>...另一个之前的谜题 <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_prevent">
|
||||
If you hit "start" below, the complex contagion <icon name="blue"></icon> will just spread to everyone.
|
||||
No surprise there.
|
||||
But now, let's do the <i>opposite</i> of everything we've done before:
|
||||
<b>draw a network to <i>prevent</i> the contagion from spreading to everyone! <div class="darr"></div></b>
|
||||
如果你点击了下面的“开始”，复杂传播 <icon name="blue"></icon> 会扩散给每一个人。正如你所想，并没有什么惊喜。
|
||||
但是现在，让我们做与之前所做的一切<i>相反</i> 的事情：<b>绘制网络来<i>阻止</i> 传播！<div class="darr"></div></b>
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_prevent_2">
|
||||
You see?
|
||||
While more connections will always help the spread of <i>simple</i> ideas,
|
||||
<b>more connections can hurt the spread of <i>complex</i> ideas!</b>
|
||||
(makes you wonder about the internet, hm?)
|
||||
And this isn't just a theoretical problem. This can be a matter of life...
|
||||
你看见了吧？
|
||||
虽然更多的连接会帮助扩散<i>简单的</i> 思想，
|
||||
<b>但更多的连接也会阻止<i>复杂</i> 思想的扩散！</b>
|
||||
（是不是让你想起了互联网，嗯哼？）
|
||||
这不仅仅是一个理论上的问题。 这可能是...
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_prevent_end">
|
||||
<next wiggle>...or death. <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
<next wiggle>...生死攸关的 <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
<words id="complex_groupthink">
|
||||
|
||||
The people at NASA were smart cookies.
|
||||
I mean, they'd used Newton's theories to get us to the moon.
|
||||
Anyway, long story short, in 1986,
|
||||
<i>despite warnings from the engineers</i>,
|
||||
they launched the <i>Challenger</i>,
|
||||
which blew up and killed 7 people.
|
||||
The immediate cause:
|
||||
it was too cold that morning.
|
||||
|
||||
美国航空航天局（NASA）的人员都是聪明蛋。 我的意思是，他们用牛顿的理论让我们登上了月球。
|
||||
无论如何，再次长话短说，1986 年，<i>尽管工程师发出了警告</i>，他们仍然发射了<i>挑战者号</i>，
|
||||
结果是，爆炸导致机上 7 名机组人员无一幸免。直接原因：早上太冷了。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="height:0.9em"></div>
|
||||
|
||||
The less immediate cause: the managers ignored the engineers' warnings.
|
||||
Why? Because of <b>groupthink</b><ref id="groupthink"></ref>.
|
||||
When a group is <i>too</i> closely knit, (as they tend to be at the top of institutions)
|
||||
they become resistant to complex ideas that challenge their beliefs or ego.
|
||||
相对间接的原因：管理人员忽视了工程师的警告。
|
||||
为什么？ 因为 <b>团体迷思</b> <ref id="groupthink"></ref>。
|
||||
当一个团队<i>过于</i> 紧密，（因为他们往往是机构的顶端）他们会抵制挑战自己信仰或自尊的复杂思想。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="height:0.9em"></div>
|
||||
|
||||
So, that's how institutions can fall to crowd madness.
|
||||
But how can we "design" for crowd <i>wisdom?</i>
|
||||
In short, two words:
|
||||
总之，这就是机构如何陷入了群体的愚蠢与疯狂。那么我们怎样“设计”才能使群体富有<i>智慧</i> 呢？ 简而言之，两个词：
|
||||
|
||||
<next>Bonding & Bridging <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
<next>内聚 & 桥接 <div class="rarr"></div> </next>
|
||||
|
||||
</words>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue