英語文化：揭祕極客帝國“硅谷”

摘要：英國有Silicon Fen, Silicon Roundabout, 蘇格蘭有silicon glen。柏林吹捧Silicon Allee, 紐約則是Silicon Alley。但是整個科技世界的大腦則是位於舊金山中心及周邊的這個生態系統。硅谷的創業家、發明家，科技能手和賺錢能手都在爲全球經濟的各個方面引領革命。

Silicon Valley should be celebrated. But its insularity risks a backlash

THE English have Silicon Fen and Silicon Roundabout, the Scots have Silicon Glen. Berlin boasts Silicon Allee, New York Silicon Alley. But the brain of the tech world is the ecosystem in and around San Francisco. Silicon Valley’s entrepreneurs and innovators, technologists and moneymen are busy revolutionising nearly every aspect of the global economy.

硅谷應當受到歡慶。但是它的與世隔絕可能會在將來造成公衆的口誅筆伐

揭祕極客帝國“硅谷”

英國有Silicon Fen, Silicon Roundabout, 蘇格蘭有silicon glen。柏林吹捧Silicon Allee, 紐約則是Silicon Alley。但是整個科技世界的大腦則是位於舊金山中心及周邊的這個生態系統。硅谷的創業家、發明家，科技能手和賺錢能手都在爲全球經濟的各個方面引領革命。

A place named for its skill in making silicon-packed semiconductors is transforming how firms make decisions, people make friends and protesters make a fuss. Startups touch more people, more quickly than ever before. Airbnb, a seven-year-old firm that helps people turn their homes into hotels, operates in 34,000 towns and cities around the world. “On-demand” firms like Uber are changing what it means to be an employee. Just as the big platforms like Google, Facebook and Apple benefit from “network effects”, because each new user makes the service more valuable for all the others, so the Valley’s success as a venue to launch, fund, staff and sell a technology firm is feeding on itself (see article).

這個地方以其製造硅密集的半導體技術而命名，它在改變着公司決策、人們交友、抗議者聚衆鬧事的方式。創業公司在以前所未有的速度影響着更多的人。Airbnb，一家幫人們把家變成旅館的七年公司，在世界上34000個城鎮中運營着他們的生意。“隨叫隨到”的公司，如Uber，正在改變“僱員”的定義。就像谷歌、臉書和蘋果從“網絡效應”中獲益一樣，因爲每個新用戶都會讓某項服務對所有其他用戶更加有價值，所以硅谷作爲發佈、集資、僱傭到賣掉一家科技公司的一站式地點，這種成功在不斷自我延續。

As a result, American capitalism has a new hub in the west. Wall Street used to be the place to seek fortunes and make deals; now it is increasingly the Valley. The area’s tech companies are worth over $3 trillion. Last year one in five American business-school graduates piled into tech. Jamie Dimon, the boss of JPMorgan Chase, has warned of mounting competition for Wall Street. Goldman Sachs recently held its annual shareholder meeting in San Francisco.

於是美國的資本主義在西部有了新的樞紐。華爾街過去是尋求財富和做買賣的地方;如今越來越多是在硅谷。硅谷地區的科技公司價值3萬億。去年美國商學院的畢業生中每五個就有一個踏進科技領域。摩根大通集團的老闆Jamie Dimon曾經警告華爾街說競爭會越來越激烈。高盛將最近一次股東大會放在舊金山舉行。

The enormous, disruptive creativity of Silicon Valley is unlike anything since the genius of the great 19th-century inventors. Its triumph is to be celebrated. But the accumulation of so much wealth so fast comes with risks. The 1990s saw a financial bubble that ended in a spectacular bust. This time the danger is insularity. The geeks live in a bubble that seals off their empire from the world they are doing so much to change.

硅谷無與倫比、破舊立新的創造力是自19世紀偉大的天才發明家以來前所未見的。它的勝利值得慶祝。但是財富積累得如此迅速如此之多，勢必帶來風險。九十年代見證了金融泡沫的轟然倒塌。這次的風險是極客們的與世隔絕。他們畫出了一個泡泡，將自己的帝國和他們改變良多的世界隔絕開來。

Silicon lining

硅谷中的一線光明

The American economy would be hit hard by a repeat of the financial shock that followed the dotcom crash in 2000. With the NASDAQ index near its record high, this is a common fear. Fortunately, although money and talent are pouring into the Valley, there is not yet much danger of a disastrous bust. That is because tech companies today not only have more robust business models than their dotcom predecessors did (ie, many actually make money), but they also rely on a smaller group of financial backers.

美國經濟會在2000年互聯網泡沫崩潰後受到一輪輪金融動盪的襲擊。納斯達克指數現在已經臨近歷史最高點，人們普遍感到恐慌。雖然人才和錢財瘋狂涌入硅谷，但是幸運的是一場災難性的崩潰的風險並不大。因爲今日的科技公司不僅比互聯網泡沫時期的科技公司有更具彈性的商業模型(比如，很多公司實際是盈利的)，而且他們背後有小型金融財團的支持。

Today’s firms are staying private for longer. Tech firms that went public in 2014 were on average 11 years old; back in 1999 they waited only four years before listing their shares. Tapping wealthy investors means risk is borne by people who can afford to take losses. It is easy to lament the decline of the publicly listed company (though even when founders do list they keep a tight rein), but if tech firms fall short of their promises, ordinary investors are less likely to see their wealth destroyed.

如今的公司願意花更長時間保持私有。2014年上市的科技公司平均有11年曆史;1999年科技公司在創業4年後就公開股份。利用富有的投資人就意味着由這些不怕損失的人們來承擔風險。對上市公司數量的下降感到遺憾是太簡單的事情(即使創始人將公司上市，他們還是將公司控制在咫尺之內)，但是如果科技公司無法踐行諾言，一般投資者不大可能受到損失。

Staying private allows entrepreneurs to avoid the headaches that come from being quoted: the nuisance of activist investors, the drudgery of compliance, the vision-crushing ritual of quarterly reporting. In theory, a coterie of investors is better than an anonymous multitude of shareholders at making sure managers act in the interests of all a firm’s owners.

公司不上市讓創業者們不必爲自己的言論上報而頭疼：激進投資人的煩人行徑，費力不討好的迎合，摧毀遠見的季度報告。理論上，在確保管理層的行爲符合所有公司所有者的利益上，一小撮投資者總比一大堆不知名的股東更好對付。

But staying private has risks, too. One is that firms under no obligation to make public a full set of audited accounts will remain veiled from the scrutiny of analysts and short-sellers and so act irresponsibly. America’s tech “unicorns”—firms that have reached a valuation of more than $1 billion—are worth around $300 billion between them. The danger that some of this capital is being misallocated is high.

但是不上市也有風險。其一是，如果公司沒有將審計賬目公開的義務，它們將遠離分析人員和賣空行家的審視目光，所以這些公司會胡作非爲。美國科技“獨角獸”——價值超過十億美元的公司——總共價值三千億美元。這些資金被錯置的風險很高。

The other risk is that a charmed circle with great wealth becomes cut off from everyone else. For a group rewriting the rules for industry after industry, that is a special danger.

另一個風險是，這種如有神助的巨資循環遠離了其他人羣。對於一個改寫了許多行業規矩的團體來說，這是一個特別的風險。

The empire of the geeks draws its strength from a culture of techno-evangelism that enables entrepreneurs to rethink old systems and embrace new ones. Many denizens of the Valley believe that tech is the solution to all ills and that government is just an annoyance that still lacks an algorithm. So far the public’s relationship with the tech titans has been mostly harmonious. Consumers enjoy their taxi-hailing apps, music streaming and voice-recognition software.

極客帝國從一種熱烈鼓吹科技的文化中汲取能量，這讓創業家們對老系統進行重新思考，張開雙臂迎接新系統。硅谷谷民相信科技包治百病，政府是個還沒采用計算機算法的惹人嫌的存在。迄今爲止公衆與科技大神們相處極爲融洽。消費者享用着打車應用、音樂在線播放和語音識別軟件。

Yet cracking open established industries inevitably results in conflict. Uber is the firm most embroiled in controversy, whether facing licensed taxi-drivers on the streets or demands from its own drivers in the courts. European regulators are also scrutinising firms like Facebook and Google for everything from antitrust concerns to data protection. And American regulators are reportedly looking at whether Apple has abused its clout in the music business.

但是在成熟的行業中開闢新路勢必會造成衝突。Uber是處於在風口浪尖上的公司，無論它面對的是街上持許可證的出租車司機，還是法庭上它自己的司機用戶。歐洲國家的監管部門同樣在事無鉅細地審批臉書、谷歌這樣的公司，從反壟斷到數據保護。美國的監管部門則在審查蘋果是否在濫用它在音樂商業中的影響力。

Critics are often from industries wanting to protect their privileges; the geeks’ aggressive behaviour is sometimes part of the creative destruction that leads to progress. But that is not the only source of anger. Silicon Valley also dominates markets, sucks out the value contained in personal data, and erects business models that make money partly by avoiding taxes. There is a risk that global consumers will feel exploited and that the effects of a shrinking tax base will infuriate voters. If the perception takes root that enormous profits from exploiting data and avoiding taxes are crystallised in the fortunes of a few people living on a patch of ground near San Francisco, then there will be a backlash.

批評的人往往來自想要保護自身利益的行當;有時極客們侵略性的行爲是一種創造式的摧毀，最後會引向進步。但人們的憤怒不僅來源於此。硅谷還霸佔了市場，將個人數據中的價值壓榨得一乾二淨，創造出部分靠避稅盈利的商業模式。潛在的風險是，全球的消費者感到被剝削利用，稅收的減少會激怒投票者。在舊金山住的這些人利用個人數據和逃稅爲自己牟取了巨大的財富，這種看法一旦形成，會有民衆強烈反對他們的行爲。

Mind the techlash

小心民衆的一致反對

The Valley’s firms are hardly the only ones to push against taxes and regulation. They are free to operate as they like within the law. But they risk becoming targets because they are so global. They should remember that the law can change. If they want a seat at the table when it does, they need to be part of the markets they sell into, not isolated from them. Even private firms run by geniuses need a licence from society to operate.

硅谷的公司不可能是唯一稅務和法規上打擦邊球的。他們在法律允許範疇之內任意運籌，但是可能會因爲他們的全球性而成爲靶子。他們應當銘記，法律是可以改變的。如果他們想在法律改變之際有發言權，他們就必須成爲他們市場的一部分，而不是與其隔絕。即使是天才運營的私有公司還需要社會頒發一張許可才能經營呢。

At its best Silicon Valley is an expression of iconoclastic freedom and creativity. It would be a terrible shame if it became an unpopular and remote manifestation of elitism.

硅谷最多是反傳統的自由、創新的一種表達。如果它變成了一種不受歡迎、只能遠觀的精英主義，纔是令其顏面掃地的事。