Reference & Bonus
This commit is contained in:
foxieeeeeeeee
olOwOlo
parent
0df9f09c39
commit
9285a1f99a
439
zh-CN.html
439
zh-CN.html
|
|
@ -1056,48 +1056,47 @@ Sorry, not done yet! These Bonus Boxes need you to TRANSLATE, too:
|
|||
<bonus id="books">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
A quick response to James Surowiecki's <i>The Wisdom of Crowds</i>
|
||||
对James Surowiecki的著作<i>群体的智慧</i>的一个简短书评
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/surowieki.jpg" width="200" height="300" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
|
||||
First off, I'm not dissing
|
||||
首先，我不是要贬低诋毁
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds">
|
||||
this book.</a>
|
||||
It's a good book, and Surowiecki was trying to tackle the same question I am:
|
||||
<b>“why do some crowds turn to madness, or wisdom?”</b>
|
||||
这本书。</a>
|
||||
这是本好书，而且Surowiecki在书中试着去回答同一个问题，那就是：
|
||||
<b>“为什么有些情况下群体变得疯狂愚蠢，有些情况下却变得更富有智慧？”</b>
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
Surowiecki的答案是：当一个群体中的每个成员能够尽可能地保持自我独立的时候，这个群体就会做出明智的选择。
|
||||
他讲了一个郡县集市上发生的故事，
|
||||
镇上的居民被邀请去猜一把斧子的重量。
|
||||
惊人的是，他们<i>所有人</i>的猜测的平均数比任何<i>一个人</i>的猜测更接近答案。
|
||||
但是这有一个前提：人们必须<i>独立地</i>进行猜测。
|
||||
否则，
|
||||
他们就会被早先的错误猜测所影响，
|
||||
而且平均答案也会被严重歪曲。
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
Surowiecki's answer: crowds make good decisions when everybody is as independent as possible.
|
||||
He gives the story of a county fair,
|
||||
where the townsfolk were invited to guess the weight of an ox.
|
||||
Surprisingly, the average of <i>all</i> their guesses was better than any <i>one</i> guess</i>.
|
||||
But, here's the rub: the people have to guess <i>independently</i> of each other.
|
||||
Otherwise,
|
||||
they'd be influenced by earlier incorrect guesses,
|
||||
and the average answer would be highly skewed.
|
||||
但是... 我不认为“让每个人尽可能地保持独立”是完整的答案。
|
||||
就算是天才们，那些可能被我们误以为是最独立的思考者们，
|
||||
他们也深深地被别人影响着。就像艾萨克·牛顿爵士说的，
|
||||
<i>“如果我看的比别人更远，那是因为我站在巨人的肩膀上。”</i>
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
But... I don't think "make everyone as independent as possible" is the full answer.
|
||||
Even geniuses, who we mischaracterize as the most independent thinkers,
|
||||
are deeply influenced by others. As Sir Isaac Newton said,
|
||||
<i>“If I have seen further, it is by standing on the sholders of Giants.”</i>
|
||||
所以说，哪一个答案才是正确的？
|
||||
智慧究竟是来源于你的自我思考，还是与别人一起思考？
|
||||
答案是：“都是。”
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
So, which idea is correct?
|
||||
Does wisdom come from thinking for yourself, or thinking with others?
|
||||
The answer is: "yes".
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
So that's what I'll try to explain in this explorable explanation:
|
||||
how to get that sweet spot between independence and interdependence —
|
||||
that is, how to get a wise crowd.
|
||||
所以这就是我将要在这个探索学习(explorable explanation)项目中解释的：
|
||||
如何在保持独立和互相依赖中找到最佳的状态 — 也就是，如何得到一个富有智慧的群体。
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1105,45 +1104,47 @@ Sorry, not done yet! These Bonus Boxes need you to TRANSLATE, too:
|
|||
<bonus id="connections">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
What other kinds of connections are there?
|
||||
还有什么其他的连接方式吗？
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
For the sake of simplicity,
|
||||
my simulations pretend that people can only be connected through friendships,
|
||||
and that all friendships are equal.
|
||||
But network scientists <i>do</i> consider other ways we can be connected, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
简单地来说，
|
||||
我的模拟仅仅假设人们会通过友谊互相连接，
|
||||
以及所有的友谊是互相平等的。
|
||||
但是社会网络研究人员<i>的确</i>会把其他的将我们联系在一起的方式考虑进来，
|
||||
比如说：
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/connection1.png" width="250" height="150" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>Directional connections.</b> Alice is the boss of Bob, but Bob is not the boss of Alice.
|
||||
Carol is the parent of Dave, but Dave is not the parent of Carol.
|
||||
"Boss" & "parent" are <i>directional</i> relationships:
|
||||
the relationship only goes one way.
|
||||
In contrast, "friends" is a <i>bidirectional</i> relationship:
|
||||
the relationship goes both ways. (well, hopefully)
|
||||
<b>定向联系。</b> Alice是Bob的上司, 但是Bob不是Alice的上司。
|
||||
Carol是Dave的父母，但Dave不是Carol的父母。
|
||||
“上司” & “父母”就是<i>定向</i>的关系：
|
||||
这种关系只具有单一的方向。
|
||||
反过来，“朋友”是一个<i>双向</i>的关系：
|
||||
这种关系两边都说得通。(希望如此)
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/connection2.png" width="250" height="150" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>Weighted connections.</b> Elinor and Frankie are mere acquaintances.
|
||||
George and Harry are Best Friends Forever.
|
||||
Even though there's a "friendship" connection in both cases, the second one is stronger.
|
||||
We say that these two connections have different "weights".
|
||||
<b>权重关系。</b> Elinor和Frankie只是互相认识。
|
||||
George和Harry是彼此最好的朋友(BFF)。
|
||||
尽管这两个例子中都有“友情”的联系，第二个联系则更强。
|
||||
我们称这两种联系具有不同的“权重”。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/map.png" width="200" height="200" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
Just remember: <b>all these simulations are wrong.</b> The same way any map is "wrong".
|
||||
You see the map on the left? Buildings aren't gray featureless blocks!
|
||||
Words don't float above the city! However, maps are useful not <i>despite</i> being simplified,
|
||||
but <i>because</i> they're simplified. Same goes for simulations, or any scientific theory.
|
||||
Of <i>course</i> they're "wrong" — that's what makes them <i>useful</i>.
|
||||
要记住的是: <b>所有这些模拟情景都是错的</b> 同样，所有的地图也都是“错的”。
|
||||
你看到左边的地图了？建筑物才不是灰色毫无生气的一大块！
|
||||
语言文字不会在城市上空飘散！然而，地图是有用的<i>尽管</i>并不是在于他们被简化了，
|
||||
而是<i>因为</i>他们是被简化的。(译注：被简化的地图是错误的，但简化却会使地图对人们更有用。)
|
||||
这些情景模拟以及任何科学理论都是如此。
|
||||
<i>当然了</i>，他们是错误的 — 但这使他们变得 <i>有用</i>.
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1151,52 +1152,52 @@ Sorry, not done yet! These Bonus Boxes need you to TRANSLATE, too:
|
|||
<bonus id="contagions">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
What other kinds of contagions are there?
|
||||
还有些别的什么样的传播存在吗？
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
There are so, so many ways that network scientists can simulate "contagions"!
|
||||
I picked the simplest one, for educational purposes.
|
||||
But here's other ways you could do it:
|
||||
有很多很多方式可以被网络科学研究人员用来模拟“传播”!
|
||||
我选了最简单的一种，出于教学的目的。
|
||||
但是仍然有许多其他方式你可以选择尝试去做：
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/contagion1.png" width="250" height="150" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>Contagions with Randomness</b>.
|
||||
Being "exposed" to a contagion doesn't <i>guarantee</i> you'll be infected,
|
||||
it only makes it more <i>likely</i>.
|
||||
<b>传播与随机性</b>.
|
||||
被暴露在一个传播关系中并不能<i>保证</i>你会被传染，
|
||||
它只能让你<i>更容易</i>被传染。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/contagion2.png" width="250" height="150" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>People have different contagion thresholds.</b>
|
||||
My simulations pretend that everyone has the same threshold for binge-drinking (50%) or
|
||||
volunteering (25%) or misinformation (0%).
|
||||
Of course, that's not true in real life, and you could make your sim reflect that.
|
||||
<b>人们拥有不同的传播临界值。</b>
|
||||
我的情景模拟假设每个人对于不同的事物都有一样的传播临界值，酗酒(50%)，义工(25%)，或者错误信息(0%)。
|
||||
当然了这在现实生活中是不真实的，你可以制作你自己的情景模拟来反映那些情况。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/contagion3.png" width="250" height="150" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>An ecology of contagions.</b>
|
||||
What if there were <i>multiple</i> contagions, with <i>different</i> thresholds?
|
||||
For example, a simple "madness" contagion and a complex "wisdom" contagion.
|
||||
If someone's infected with madness, can they still be infected with wisdom?
|
||||
Or vice versa?
|
||||
Can someone be infected with both?
|
||||
<b>传播的生态环境。</b>
|
||||
如果现在有<i>复数个传播，并且都存在<i>不同的</i>传播临界值？
|
||||
比如说，一个简单的“愚蠢/负面”传播和一个复杂的“智慧/正面”传播。
|
||||
如果有人被愚蠢所传染，他们还能够被智慧传染吗？
|
||||
或者，反之亦然？
|
||||
有没有人会被两者同时传染？
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/contagion4.png" width="250" height="150" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>Contagions that mutate and evolve.</b>
|
||||
Ideas don't pass perfectly from one person to another the way a virus does.
|
||||
Like a game of Telephone, the message gets mutated with each re-telling —
|
||||
and sometimes the mutant will be more infectious than the original!
|
||||
So, over time, ideas "evolve" to be more catchy, copy-able, contagious.
|
||||
<b>传播的变异和进化。</b>
|
||||
人们的思考并不会像病毒一样完美地从一个人传递到另一个人身上。
|
||||
就像传话游戏，信息会在每一次重述的过程中发生变异。
|
||||
—
|
||||
而且有时候这些变化的部分甚至比原有的部分更具有传染性!
|
||||
所以，随着时间流逝，信息会“进化”地更加吸引人，可复制，更具有传染性。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1206,53 +1207,53 @@ Sorry, not done yet! These Bonus Boxes need you to TRANSLATE, too:
|
|||
<bonus id="further_reading">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
I wanna learn more! What else can I read and/or play?
|
||||
我想知道更多!还有什么别的我可以看/玩的？
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
This explorable explanation was just a springboard for your curiosity,
|
||||
so you can dive deeper into a vast pool of knowledge!
|
||||
Here's more stuff on networks or social systems:
|
||||
这个探索学习(explorable explanation)项目只是你好奇心的一个跳板，
|
||||
可以让你在知识的广阔海洋里潜得更深！
|
||||
这儿还有些关于社交网络或者社会系统的材料：
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/connected.png" width="200" height="200" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>Book:</b>
|
||||
<b>书:</b>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.connectedthebook.com/">
|
||||
Connected</a>
|
||||
by Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler (2009).
|
||||
An accessible tour of how our networks affect our lives, for good or ill.
|
||||
这本书会带给你一趟通俗易懂的旅程，展示我们的社交网络是如何影响我们的生活的，从好的坏的两个方面。
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.connectedthebook.com/pdf/excerpt.pdf">
|
||||
Here's an excerpt: Preface & Chapter 1
|
||||
这是一点书摘: 前言 & 第一章
|
||||
</a>
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/trust.png" width="200" height="200" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>Interactive:</b>
|
||||
<b>交互项目:</b>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://ncase.me/trust/">
|
||||
The Evolution of Trust</a> by Nicky Case (me) (2017).
|
||||
A game about the game theory of how cooperation is built... or destroyed.
|
||||
信任的进化</a> by Nicky Case (me) (2017).
|
||||
一个关于博弈论的游戏，展示了合作关系是如何建立的... 或者被毁掉的。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/polygons.png" width="200" height="200" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
<b>Interactive:</b>
|
||||
<b>交互项目:</b>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://ncase.me/polygons/">
|
||||
Parable of the Polygons</a> by Vi Hart and Nicky Case (also me) (2014).
|
||||
A story about how harmless choices can create a harmful world.
|
||||
多边形的寓言</a> by Vi Hart and Nicky Case (also me) (2014).
|
||||
一个关于无害选择是如何创造出一个伤害性的世界的故事。
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
||||
<img src="sprites/bonus/ee.png" width="200" height="200" style="float:left; margin-right:1em"/>
|
||||
Or, if you just want to see a whole gallery of interactive edu-things, here's
|
||||
或者，如果你只是想看一下交互作品/教育类的项目，这里有
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://explorabl.es/">
|
||||
Explorable Explanations</a>,
|
||||
a hub for learning through play!
|
||||
存放了一些通过玩游戏来学习的项目！
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="clear:both"></div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1271,213 +1272,204 @@ Final thing! These references also need you to TRANSLATE:
|
|||
<reference id="drunk">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“virtually all [college] students reported that their friends drank more than they did.”
|
||||
“实际上， 所有[大学]学生都说他们的朋友喝酒比他们自己要更多。”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1758185">
|
||||
“Biases in the perception of drinking norms among college students”</a> by Baer et al (1991)
|
||||
“大学生群体中饮酒行为观点上的偏见”
|
||||
</a> by Baer et al (1991)
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="majority">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“The Majority Illusion”
|
||||
“多数错觉”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147617">
|
||||
“The Majority Illusion in Social Networks”</a> by Lerman et al (2016).
|
||||
“社交网络中的多数错觉”</a> by Lerman et al (2016).
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
Related: <a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox">
|
||||
The Friendship Paradox</a>.
|
||||
相关链接: <a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox">
|
||||
友谊悖论</a>.
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="contagion">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“strong statistical evidence that
|
||||
smoking, health, happiness, voting patterns, and cooperation levels
|
||||
are all contagious”
|
||||
“强有力的统计学数据表明，抽烟、健康、幸福指数、投票倾向以及默契度都是互相传播的。”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
From Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler's
|
||||
wonderfully-written, layperson-accessible book,
|
||||
摘录自 Nicholas Christakis 和 James Fowler's
|
||||
写得超级棒的, 普通人也看的懂的一本书,
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.connectedthebook.com/">
|
||||
Connected</a> (2009).
|
||||
联结</a> (2009).
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="suicides">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“some evidence that suicides are [contagious], too”
|
||||
“一些证据表明自杀也是[彼此传播]的”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/42000514?seq=4#page_scan_tab_contents">
|
||||
“Suicide Contagion and the Reporting of Suicide: Recommendations from a National Workshop”</a>
|
||||
by O'Carroll et al (1994), endorsed by the frickin' Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC).
|
||||
“自杀模仿和自杀的报道：来自一个国民研讨会的建议”</a>
|
||||
by O'Carroll et al (1994), 这篇论文得到美国疾病防控中心(CDC)的强烈认可与赞同。
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="shootings">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“some evidence that mass shootings are [contagious], too”
|
||||
“一些证据表明大量枪击事件也是[彼此传播]的”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0117259">
|
||||
“Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings”</a> by Towers et al (2015).
|
||||
“大规模枪击和校园枪击事件中的传播”</a> by Towers et al (2015).
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
Also see: the
|
||||
另见:
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.dontnamethem.org/">
|
||||
Don't Name Them</a> campaign,
|
||||
which urges that news outlets <i>DO NOT</i> air mass murderers' names, manifestos, and social media feeds.
|
||||
This spreads the contagion.
|
||||
Instead, news outlets should focus on the victims, first responders, civilian heroes,
|
||||
and the grieving, healing community.
|
||||
|
||||
Don't Name Them</a> 运动,
|
||||
这个运动驱策新闻媒体<i>不要</i>大量散布凶手的姓名、宣言和社交网络上的言论。
|
||||
这会扩散这份(不良的)传播。
|
||||
相反的，新闻媒体应该更多地关注受害者，第一发现人，市民英雄和悲痛的受害者亲属与社区。
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="subprime">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“The world's financial institutions fell for such a cascade in 2008.”
|
||||
“全世界的金融机构都因为2008年的金融危机而倒下了。”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://newrepublic.com/article/63023/wall-streets-lemmings">
|
||||
“Lemmings of Wall Street”</a> by Cass Sunstein, is a quick, non-technical read.
|
||||
Published in Oct 2008, right in the wake of the crash.
|
||||
“华尔街的旅鼠”</a> by Cass Sunstein, 这是一篇适宜快读，且并不技术化的书。
|
||||
发表于2008年十月，刚好正在大危机醒来之时。
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="complex">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“the complex contagion theory.”
|
||||
“复杂传播理论。”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://www.unc.edu/~fbaum/teaching/articles/Granovetter_AJS_1978.pdf">
|
||||
“Threshold Models of Collective Behavior”</a> by Granovetter (1978)
|
||||
was the first time, as far as I know, anyone described a "complex contagion" model.
|
||||
(although he didn't use that specific name)
|
||||
“集体行为的临界值模型”</a> by Granovetter (1978)
|
||||
这是据我所知有史以来的第一次，有人将其描述为[复杂传播]模型。
|
||||
(尽管他没有用到这个特定的名称)
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180802">
|
||||
“Evidence for complex contagion models of social contagion from observational data”</a>
|
||||
“观察数据中得出的社会传播的复杂传播模型例证”
|
||||
</a>
|
||||
by Sprague & House (2017)
|
||||
shows that complex contagions do, in fact, exist. (at least, in the social media data they looked at)
|
||||
这篇论文展示了复杂传播的确存在。（至少在作者们调查的社交网络数据上存在）
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
Finally,
|
||||
最后,
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0403699.pdf">
|
||||
“Universal behavior in a generalized model of contagion”</a> by Dodds & Watts (2004)
|
||||
proposes a model that unifies <i>all</i> kinds of contagions:
|
||||
simple and complex, biological and social!
|
||||
|
||||
“普遍传播模型中的普适行为”
|
||||
</a> by Dodds & Watts (2004)
|
||||
这篇论文提出了一个整合<i>所有</i>传播的模型：
|
||||
简单又复杂，生理化又社会化！
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="possum">
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“the possum has 13 nipples”
|
||||
“负鼠有13个乳头”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
arranged in a ring of 12 nipples, plus one in the middle
|
||||
12个排成一个圆圈，多出一个在中间
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="groupthink">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“groupthink”
|
||||
“团体迷思”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
This Orwell-inspired phrase was coined by Irving L. Janis in 1971.
|
||||
这个受奥威尔启发的词组被Irving L. Janis在1971年首次使用。
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20100401033524/http://apps.olin.wustl.edu/faculty/macdonald/GroupThink.pdf">
|
||||
In his original article</a>,
|
||||
Janis investigates cases of groupthink, lists its causes, and — thankfully —
|
||||
some possible remedies.
|
||||
在他原本的文章中</a>,
|
||||
Janis详细审查了团体迷思的案例，列出了其中的成因，以及 — 令人感激的 —
|
||||
一些或许可行的补救办法。
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="social_capital">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“bonding and bridging social capital”
|
||||
“内聚和桥接型社会资本”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
These two types of social capital — "bonding" and "bridging" —
|
||||
were named by Robert Putnam in his insightful 2000 book,
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
这两种社会资本的形态 — “内聚”和“桥接” —
|
||||
是由Robert Putnam命名的，可见于他于2000年出版的非常具有远见的书，
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://bowlingalone.com/">
|
||||
Bowling Alone</a>. His discovery:
|
||||
across almost <i>all</i> empircal measures of social connectiveness,
|
||||
Americans are more alone than ever.
|
||||
Golly.
|
||||
Bowling Alone</a>. 他的发现包括:
|
||||
纵观<i>所有</i>有关于社会联系的经验证据，
|
||||
美国人比以前更寂寞了。
|
||||
天哪。
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="bridge">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“bridging social capital has a sweet spot”
|
||||
“桥接型社会资本有一个最佳点”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://sociology.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/the_strength_of_weak_ties_and_exch_w-gans.pdf">
|
||||
“The Strength of Weak Ties”</a> by Granovetter (1973)
|
||||
showed that connections across groups helps spread simple contagions (like information),
|
||||
but
|
||||
“微弱联系的力量”</a> by Granovetter (1973)
|
||||
这篇论文写出了不同群体之间的联系对简单联结传播的帮助(比如说信息),
|
||||
但是
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/521848?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">
|
||||
“Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties”</a> by Centola & Macy (2007)
|
||||
showed that connections across groups may not help complex contagions,
|
||||
and it fact, can hurt their spread!
|
||||
“复杂传播和远距离联系的弱点”</a> by Centola & Macy (2007)
|
||||
这篇论文给出推论，不同群体间的传播可能不会有助于复杂传播，事实上会伤害到传播的传递!
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="small_world">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“the small world network”
|
||||
“小世界网络”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
The idea of the "small world" was popularized by
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/2786545">Travers & Milgram's 1969 experiment</a>,
|
||||
which showed that, on average, any two random people in the United States
|
||||
were just six friendships apart — "six degrees of separation"!
|
||||
“小世界”的概念是由<a target="_blank" href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/2786545">Travers & Milgram 1969年的实验</a>得到普及的。
|
||||
这个实验显示，平均来说，在美国任意挑两个人，他们之间都可以被六个间接朋友联系起来 —“六度分隔理论”!
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
The small-world network got more mathematical meat on its bones with
|
||||
小世界网络概念在这篇论文中得到了更多的数学论证
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://leonidzhukov.net/hse/2014/socialnetworks/papers/watts-collective_dynamics-nature_1998.pdf">
|
||||
“Collective dynamics of small-world networks”</a> by Watts & Strogatz (1998),
|
||||
which proposed an algorithm for creating networks
|
||||
with both low average path length (low degree of separation)
|
||||
and high clustering (friends have lots of mutual friends) —
|
||||
that is, a network that hits the sweet spot!
|
||||
“小世界”网络的集体动力学”</a> by Watts & Strogatz (1998),
|
||||
这篇论文提出了一个创造人际网络的算法，这个方法同时具有较短的平均传播长度（互相隔离的程度低）和较高的聚集度（朋友们彼此有很多共同好友） — 这就是一个人际网络的最佳状态。
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
You can also play with
|
||||
你也可以试玩一下这个
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://worrydream.com/ScientificCommunicationAsSequentialArt/">
|
||||
the visual, interactive adaptation of that paper</a> by Bret Victor (2011).
|
||||
一个由那篇论文改编而来的视觉交互项目</a> by Bret Victor (2011).
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1485,101 +1477,92 @@ Final thing! These references also need you to TRANSLATE:
|
|||
<reference id="swn_neurons">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“[small world networks] describe how our neurons are connected”
|
||||
“[小世界网络]描绘了我们的神经元是如何互相连接的”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17079517">
|
||||
“Small-world brain networks”</a> by Bassett & Bullmore (2006).
|
||||
“小世界人脑网络”</a> by Bassett & Bullmore (2006).
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="swn_creativity">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“[small world networks] give rise to collective creativity”
|
||||
“[小世界网络]使集体创造力得以提升”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/432782?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">
|
||||
“Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem”</a> by Uzzi & Spiro (2005).
|
||||
This paper analyzed the social network of the Broadway scene over time,
|
||||
and discovered that, yup, the network's most creative when it's a "small world" network!
|
||||
|
||||
“合作与创造力: 小世界问题”</a> by Uzzi & Spiro (2005).
|
||||
这篇论文纵向分析了长期以来百老汇音乐剧领域的社交网络并且发现，是的没错，当人际网络是一个“小世界”网络时最具有创造力!
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="swn_social_physics">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“[small world networks] give rise to collective problem-solving”
|
||||
“[小世界网络]使集体解决问题的能力得以提升”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
See
|
||||
详见如下
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://socialphysics.media.mit.edu/">
|
||||
“Social Physics”</a> by MIT Professor Alex "Sandy" Pentland (2014)
|
||||
for a data-based approach to collective intelligence.
|
||||
“社会物理学”</a> by MIT Professor Alex "Sandy" Pentland (2014)
|
||||
这是一个以数据为基础探寻集体智慧的项目。
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="swn_jfk">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“[small world networks] helped John F. Kennedy (barely) avoid nuclear war!”
|
||||
“[小世界网络](勉强)帮助肯尼迪总统避免了核战争!”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
Besides the NASA Challenger explosion, the most notorious example of groupthink
|
||||
was the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
|
||||
In 1961, US President John F. Kennedy and his team of advisors thought
|
||||
— for some reason —
|
||||
it would be a good idea to secretly invade Cuba and overthrow Fidel Castro.
|
||||
They failed.
|
||||
Actually, worse than failed: it led to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962,
|
||||
<i>the closest the world had ever been to full-scale nuclear war.</i>
|
||||
除了NASA的挑战者爆炸事件，最臭名昭著的团体迷思样例就是猪湾事件。
|
||||
1961年，美国总统约翰·肯尼迪和他的顾问团队— 出于某些原因(不知怎么的) —认为秘密进攻古巴并且推翻菲德尔·卡斯特罗会是个好主意。
|
||||
他们失败了。
|
||||
实际上甚至比失败更糟：这直接导致了1962年的古巴导弹危机，<i>这是全世界有史以来距离全面核战争爆发最近的一次。</i>
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
Yup, JFK really screwed up on that one.
|
||||
是的，肯尼迪总统真的搞砸了这事。
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
But, having learnt some hard lessons from the Bay of Pigs fiasco,
|
||||
JFK re-organized his team to avoid groupthink.
|
||||
Among many things, he:
|
||||
1) actively encouraged people to voice criticism,
|
||||
thus lowering the "contagion threshold" for alternate ideas.
|
||||
And
|
||||
2) he broke his team up into sub-groups before reconvening,
|
||||
which gave their group a "small world network"-like design!
|
||||
Together, this arrangement allowed for a healthy diversity of opinion,
|
||||
but without being too fractured — a wisdom of crowds.
|
||||
但是，他从猪湾事件中吸取了教训，
|
||||
肯尼迪总统重组了他的顾问团队去避免团体迷思。
|
||||
他做了很多事情，这其中包括:
|
||||
1) 积极地鼓励人们发出批评的声音,
|
||||
因此得以使其他点子和提案的“传播临界值”变得更低
|
||||
并且
|
||||
2) 他在重组召集团队之前，把自己的团队打破成了一个个子团队
|
||||
这使得这些小队伍形成了类似[小世界网络]式的设计!
|
||||
综合来看，这样的安排为观点看法保证了一个健康的多元化环境，但同时也不会使 — 群众之智由于分解而被削弱。
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
于是所以我们可以看到，尽管是决定了猪湾事件的<i>同一个人</i>，和决定了古巴导弹危机的<i>同一个团队</i>，
|
||||
随着重组，肯尼迪总统的团队能够与苏联首领赫鲁晓夫达成和平协议。
|
||||
苏联会从古巴撤离他们的导弹，与之相应的，
|
||||
美国承诺不再入侵古巴。
|
||||
(他们也秘密地承诺从土耳其撤离美国的导弹)
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
这就是一个“当所有人性都几乎灭绝的时候，小世界网络拯救了全人类!”的故事，有点可以那样说。
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
And so, with the same <i>individuals</i> who decided the Bay of Pigs,
|
||||
but re-arranged <i>collectively</i> to decide on the Cuban Missile Crisis...
|
||||
JFK's team was able to reach a peaceful agreement with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev.
|
||||
The Soviets would remove their missiles from Cuba, and in return,
|
||||
the US would promise not to invade Cuba again.
|
||||
(and also agreed, in secret, to remove the US missiles from Turkey)
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
And that's the story of how all of humanity almost died.
|
||||
But a small world network saved the day! Sort of.
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
You can read more about this
|
||||
你可以阅读更多关于这个主题的内容
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://hbr.org/2013/11/how-john-f-kennedy-changed-decision-making">
|
||||
on Harvard Business Review</a>,
|
||||
or from
|
||||
在哈佛商业评论上</a>,
|
||||
或者是
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20100401033524/http://apps.olin.wustl.edu/faculty/macdonald/GroupThink.pdf">
|
||||
the original article on groupthink</a>.
|
||||
团体迷思的原始文章</a>.
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1587,56 +1570,54 @@ Final thing! These references also need you to TRANSLATE:
|
|||
<reference id="three_degrees">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“we influence [...] our friends' friends' friends!”
|
||||
“我们影响 [...] 我们朋友的朋友的朋友!”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
Again, from Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler's
|
||||
wonderful book,
|
||||
再次，摘录自Nicholas Christakis和James Fowler的超棒的书，
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.connectedthebook.com/">
|
||||
Connected</a> (2009).
|
||||
联结</a> (2009).
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="flatter">
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
“be skeptical of ideas that flatter you”
|
||||
“对于奉承你的话要抱持怀疑态度”
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
yes, including the ideas in <i>this</i> explorable explanation.
|
||||
是的，也包括<i>这个</i>探索学习(explorable explanation)项目之中的话语。
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="sandbox">
|
||||
|
||||
<h3>
|
||||
★ Sandbox Mode ★
|
||||
★ 沙盒模式 ★
|
||||
</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
The keyboard shortcuts (1, 2, space, backspace)
|
||||
work in <i>all</i> the puzzles, not just Sandbox Mode!
|
||||
Seriously, you can go back to a different chapter,
|
||||
and edit the simulation right there.
|
||||
In fact, that's how <i>I</i> created all these puzzles. Have fun!
|
||||
键盘快捷键(1, 2, 空格键, 退格键)
|
||||
在<i>所有的</i>谜题里都适用，并不仅仅适用于沙盒模式!
|
||||
说真的，你可以后退回不同的章节，然后编辑那里的模拟器。
|
||||
其实<i>我</i>就是这样创作这些谜题的。玩得愉快!
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="supporters" hidden=yes large=yes>
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
To
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://www.patreon.com/ncase">my supporters on Patreon</a>:
|
||||
I'm deeply grateful.
|
||||
Your generosity <i>literally</i> feeds me and pays my rent,
|
||||
and grants me the creative freedom to make these weird math/social-science games.
|
||||
From the bottom of my heart, thank you!
|
||||
致
|
||||
<a target="_blank" href="https://www.patreon.com/ncase">我Patreon上的赞助人们</a>:
|
||||
我深深地感激你们。
|
||||
你们的慷慨解囊<i>真的</i>使我获得了温饱而且付清了我的房租，
|
||||
并且给予了我创作的自由去制作这些奇怪的数学/社科游戏。
|
||||
我打从心底里感谢你们!
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</reference>
|
||||
<reference id="playtesters" hidden=yes large=yes>
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
|
||||
Thank you, everyone who playtested <i>Crowds</i>
|
||||
during its many stages of life!
|
||||
|
||||
感谢你们，在这个项目历程中的各个阶段，
|
||||
每一个试玩<i>Crowds</i>的人
|
||||
|
||||
<br><br>
|
||||
<b>The Prototype:</b>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue