Talks Archive 长视频知识库
YouTube ↗
← 返回 Naval Ravikant 档案

Naval:不靠运气致富的完整路径

2019-12-25 3:35:37 1378.4万次播放 1048 句对照 YouTube ↗

How to Get Rich — 财富不是金钱也不是地位,而是睡觉时仍在赚钱的资产;致富是可复制的技能:用特定知识、问责与杠杆,在长期游戏中让复利替你工作。

财富创造特定知识杠杆问责复利
01

核心主张

财富不是金钱也不是地位,而是睡觉时仍在赚钱的资产;致富是可复制的技能:用特定知识、问责与杠杆,在长期游戏中让复利替你工作。

Naval 把致富拆成可训练的链条:先分清财富、金钱与地位,把运气变成自己创造的结果;再拒绝出租时间,用特定知识换取不可替代性,以自己的名字承担风险换来股权;最后用劳动力、资本、代码与媒体放大判断力。剩下的只是耐心,以及把自己产品化。

02

几条主线

这个视频反复回到的几个论点。

财富是正和,地位才是零和

财富可以在你睡觉时继续生产,房子建得越多、建房反而越容易;金钱只是社会开出的欠条;地位是等级排名,有人上升就有人下落。看懂这三者的区别,才不会被攻击财富的地位游戏带偏。

不要出租时间,要持有股权

薪水把投入与产出死死绑定,你睡觉、休假、退休时都停止赚钱,也拿不到非线性回报。真正的路径是特定知识、问责与杠杆:以真名承担风险换来可信度与股权,再让代码与媒体替你放大。

长期游戏,把自己产品化

复利只在重复博弈中生效,好处集中在末端,所以要选能和长期的人玩长期游戏的领域。最后把所有东西收敛成一句话:把自己独特的那部分,用尽可能多的杠杆产品化出去。

03

关键知识点

每个知识点都挂着时间戳,点击回到原片对应位置。

财富、金钱与地位

财富是睡觉时仍在赚钱的资产;金钱是社会给你的欠条,用来在人与人之间转移财富;地位是等级排名。财富可以正和创造,地位只能零和争夺。

四种运气

盲目运气;靠不停行动搅出的运气;因专业积累而能识别机会的运气;最高级的一种是打造独特的品格与品牌,让运气主动找上门,直到它更像命运。

出租时间无法致富

薪水工作把投入与产出绑死:睡觉、休假、退休时都不赚钱,也拿不到非线性回报。要致富必须持有股权,让收入与你的判断而非工时挂钩。

特定知识

无法通过培训获得、也无法被自动化的知识,长在天赋、好奇与痴迷上,多在一线实践与学徒制中被别人观察到,而不是在课堂里学会。

问责换股权

以真名承担风险,才换得可信度与杠杆;你的报酬取决于你可被替换的程度。股权是承担无限下行之后,换来的近乎无限上行。

三种杠杆

劳动力最古老也最被社会高估;资本强大却需要他人许可;代码与媒体复制成本为零、无需许可,是这一代新财富的主要来源。

04

时间线

  • 00:00开场:三小时半合集,源自《如何不靠运气致富》推文串
  • 14:42四种运气:最后一种让运气来找你
  • 24:28出租时间无法致富,必须持有股权
  • 54:45特定知识、问责、杠杆、判断力四件套
  • 1:39:53代码与媒体:无需许可的新杠杆
  • 2:02:18无限杠杆的时代,判断力成为决定性技能
  • 2:46:49产品化自己:独特性 × 杠杆 × 问责
  • 3:21:53尾声:外部性定价、伦理与学徒制
05

原话摘录

逐字命中原稿字幕,右侧时间戳可跳转。

“wealth is assets that earn while you sleep”

财富就是那些在你睡觉时仍在为你赚钱的资产。

“you build your character in a certain way and then your character becomes your destiny”

你以某种方式塑造自己的品格,然后你的品格就成了你的命运。

“your inputs are very closely tied to your outputs in almost any salary job”

在几乎任何一份薪水工作里,你的投入都紧紧绑着你的产出。

“this newest form of leverage is where all the new fortunes were made”

这种最新的杠杆,正是所有新财富被创造出来的地方。

“making money isn't even something you do it's not a skill it's who you are stamped out a million times”

赚钱甚至不是一件你去做的事,它不是技能,而是把你是谁复制一百万次。

06

行动清单

  • 把当前收入按“出租时间”与“持有股权或分成”分类,找出一个能拿到股权的切口。
  • 写下三件你做起来像玩、别人做起来像工作的事,那就是特定知识的线索。
  • 挑一种无需许可的杠杆——写作、代码或视频——持续输出,让声誉随复利积累。
  • 给自己设一个高得离谱的小时价,据此砍掉不值得亲自做的琐事与会议。
  • 只和智力、能量、诚信都在线的人玩长期重复博弈,把短期交易变成长期关系。
逐句对照 · 共 1048 句 · 点击任意一句,视频从对应秒开始播放
00:00hey this is nivi you're listening to the navall podcast this is one giant mega sowed that collects every episode we've done on getting rich all of it based on his tweet storm of how to get rich without getting lucky I've嗨,我是 Nivi,你在听 Naval 播客。这是一集超长合并特辑,把我们做过的所有关于如何致富的节目都收进来了,内容全部基于他那条“如何不靠运气致富”的推文串。我
00:14collected them all here because we're going to switch topics to the new topic of happiness on the next episode we've published one of these giant mega subs before but this one's even bigger it's about three and a half hours long把它们都收集在这里,因为下一集我们要换到新话题——幸福。我们之前发过一集这样的合并特辑,但这一集更大,大概三个半小时。
00:27it covers all the tweets from the how to get rich tweet storm plus all the Q&A that we did after that plus ten minutes of bonus material at the very end that we've never released the overall sound quality of this它涵盖了“如何致富”推文串里的每一条推文,加上之后我们做的全部问答,还有最后十分钟我们从未发布过的额外内容。这一集整体的音质
00:42mega sowed improves a lot after the first hour you can find a link to a clean transcript in the show notes or if you go to the website nav al there's no calm at the end I hope you enjoy you在第一个小时之后会好很多。节目笔记里有干净文稿的链接,或者你上网站 naval 看,网址在结尾。希望你们喜欢。
00:57probably know Nepal from his Twitter account and we're gonna be talking about his epic tweet storm on how to get rich without getting lucky we're going to go through most of the tweets in detail giving the ball a chance to你们大概是通过他的推特认识 Naval 的,今天我们要聊的是他那条史诗级推文串——如何不靠运气致富。我们会详细过一遍其中大部分推文,给 Naval 机会
01:09expand on them and just generally riff on the topic he'll probably throw in some ideas that he hasn't even published before he's also the co-founder of angel lists and opinions he's a prolific tech investor in companies like Twitter uber and去展开它们,也就这个话题随便聊。他大概还会抛一些以前没发表过的想法。他也是 AngelList 等公司的联合创始人,是位高产的科技投资人,投过 Twitter、Uber 等等
01:23many more and I'm the co-founder evangelist navall and I also co-authored the venture hacks blog with him back in the day yeah me how to get Mitch tweet storm definitely hit a nerve a lot of people say it was helpful很多公司。我是 Naval 的联合创始人兼布道者,早年还和他一起写过 Venture Hacks 博客。是啊,我。那条“如何致富”推文串确实戳中了神经,很多人说它很有帮助,
01:36reach across aisles and people outside of tech industry people in all walks of life people do want to know how to solve their money problems and everyone vaguely knows that they want to be wealthy but they don't have a good它跨越了圈层,也打动了科技行业之外的人,各行各业的人。人们确实想知道怎么解决自己的钱的问题,每个人也隐约知道自己想变富,但他们没有一套
01:48set of principles to do it by what's the difference between wealth money and status wealth is the thing that you really want wealth is assets that earn while you sleep wealth is the factory that with the robots as cranking out好的原则。财富、金钱和地位的区别是什么?财富是你真正想要的东西。财富是能在你睡觉时赚钱的资产。财富是那间有机器人不停产出东西的工厂,
02:03things wealth is the computer program that's running at night that's serving other customers wealth is even money in the bank that is being reinvested into other ass and into other businesses even a house can be a form of wealth because财富是夜里还在运行、服务其他客户的计算机程序,财富甚至是银行里被再投资到其他资产和其他生意里的钱。连一套房子都可以是一种财富,因为
02:17you can rent it out although it's probably a lower use of productivity but land and actually doing some commercial enterprise so my definition of wealth is much more businesses and assets that can earn while you sleep but really the reason你可以把它租出去,虽然这大概是对土地生产力较低的一种用法,不如真正做点商业经营。所以我对财富的定义,更多是能在你睡觉时赚钱的生意和资产。但说到底,你真正
02:30you want wealth is because it buys you freedom so you don't have to wear a tire like a collar around your so you don't have to wake up at 7 a.m. and rush to work and sit and commute traffic so想要财富,是因为它能给你买来自由,让你不必像戴项圈一样被拴住,不必早上七点起床赶着上班、坐在车里堵在路上,这样
02:39you don't have to waste away your entire life grinding all the productive hours into a way into a soulless job that doesn't fulfill you so the purpose of wealth is freedom it's nothing more than that it's like to buy fur你就不必把整个生命都耗在消磨最有生产力的时间上,耗在一份无法满足你、没有灵魂的工作里。所以财富的目的是自由,仅此而已。不是为了买皮草
02:50coats or drive Ferraris or sail yachts or jet around the world in your Gulfstream that stuff gets really boring and really stupid really fast it's really just so that you are your own sovereign individual you're not gonna get that unless大衣、开法拉利、驾游艇、坐湾流私人飞机满世界飞——那些东西很快就会变得极其无聊和愚蠢。财富真正的意义是让你成为自己的主权个体。但除非
03:03you really want it and the entire world wants it and the entire world is working hard at it and to some extent it is competitive it's a positive sum game but there are competitive elements to it because there's a finite你真心想要它,否则得不到;而全世界都想要它,全世界都在为此拼命,某种程度上它是竞争性的。它是正和游戏,但确实有竞争成分,因为社会当下的资源是有限的,
03:14amount of resources right now in society and to get the resources to do what you want you have to stand out money is how we transfer wealth money is social credits it is the ability to have credits and debits on而为了拿到资源去做你想做的事,你必须脱颖而出。金钱是我们转移财富的方式。金钱是社会信用,是你在别人的时间上拥有借贷记账的能力。
03:28other people's time if I do my job right if I create value for society Society says oh thank you we owe you something in the future for the work that you did in the past here's a little IOU let's call如果我做好我的工作,如果我为社会创造了价值,社会就说:哦谢谢,我们欠你些什么,因为你过去做了这些事。这是一张小欠条,我们
03:41that money and that money gets the base because people steal the IOUs the government prints extra io u--'s people Rometsch under io u--'s but really what money is trying to be it is trying to be a reliable Iowa you from就叫它钱。而钱会贬值,因为有人偷欠条,政府多印欠条,还有人伪造欠条。但钱真正想充当的,是一张可靠的欠条,来自
03:53society that you are owed something for something you or someone who gave you that money did in the past and we can transfer these IOUs around so really money is how we transfer well there are fundamentally two huge games in社会,意思是:你,或者把钱给你的那个人,过去做了些什么,所以社会欠你些什么,而这些欠条可以转让。所以金钱就是我们转移财富的方式。人这一生从根本上玩的是两场大游戏,
04:05life that people play one is the money game because money's not gonna solve all your problems but it's gonna solve all your money problems so I think that people know that they realize that so they want to make money but一场是金钱游戏,因为钱不能解决你所有的问题,但它能解决你所有关于钱的问题。我想人们知道这一点、也明白这一点,所以想赚钱。但
04:15at the same time many of them deep down believe that they can't make it they don't want any wealth creation to happen so this virtue signal by attacking the whole enterprise by saying well making money is evil do it bottle与此同时,他们中的很多人内心深处相信自己做不到,他们不希望任何财富创造发生,于是他们用道德姿态攻击整个事业,说“赚钱是邪恶的”、
04:28blah but what they're trying to do is they're actually playing the other game to the status game they're trying to be high status in the eyes of other people watching by saying oh I don't need money we don't want money“别做”之类的。但他们真正在做的是在玩另一场游戏——地位游戏。他们想在其他旁观者眼中显得地位很高,说“哦我不需要钱,我们不想要钱”。
04:38and then status is just your ranking in the social hierarchy so wealth is not a zero-sum game everybody in the world can have a house because you have a house doesn't take away from my ability to have a house if而地位就是你在社会等级里的排名。财富不是零和游戏。世界上每个人都可以有房子,因为你有房子并不剥夺我拥有房子的能力。
04:49anything the more houses that are built the easier it becomes to build houses the more we know about building houses and just the more people that can have houses so wealth is a very positive sum game we create things together恰恰相反,建的房子越多,建房子就越容易,我们对建房了解得越多,能拥有房子的人就越多。所以财富是一场非常正和的游戏,我们一起创造东西,
05:00we're starting this endeavor to create this hopefully piece of art that explains what we're doing at the end of it something brand-new will be create it's a positive sub-game status on the other hand is a zero-sum game it's a very我们启动这件事,想做出这件——希望是——艺术品,解释我们在做什么,到最后会有全新的东西被创造出来,这是正和游戏。而地位是零和游戏,它是
05:13old game we've been playing it since monkey tribes and it's hierarchical who's number one who's number two who's number three and for a number three to move to number two has to move out of that slot so status is zero-sum非常古老的游戏,从猴子部落时代我们就在玩了,它是等级制的:谁第一、谁第二、谁第三。而第三要变成第二,第二就必须让出那个位置。所以地位是零和
05:25game politics is an example of a status game even sports is an example of a status game to be the winner there must be a loser I don't fundamentally love status games they play an important role in our society so游戏。政治是地位游戏的一个例子,连体育都是:要有人赢,就必须有人输。我并不从根本上喜欢地位游戏——它们在社会中扮演重要角色,让
05:36we figure out who's in charge but fundamentally you play them because they're necessary evil the problem is an evolutionary basis like if you go back thousands of years status is a much better predictor of survival than wealth as you couldn't我们搞清楚谁说了算——但你玩它们,是因为它们是必要的恶。问题在于它有进化上的根源:回到几千年前,地位比财富更能预测生存。因为当时
05:49have wealth before the farming age before farmers because you couldn't store things hunter-gatherers carried everything on their backs so hunter-gatherers lived entirely in status based societies farmers started going to wealth based societies and the modern industrial economies are much more在农业时代之前你不可能拥有财富,因为东西没法储存。狩猎采集者把所有东西背在身上,所以狩猎采集者完全生活在以地位为基础的社会里。农民开始走向以财富为基础的社会,而现代工业经济是更
06:03heavily wealth based societies but there's always a subtle competition going on between status and wealth for example when journalists attack rich people or they attack the technology industry they're really bidding for status they're saying no the people are more important以财富为基础的社会。但地位与财富之间始终存在微妙的竞争。比如记者攻击富人、攻击科技行业时,他们其实是在争夺地位,他们在说:不,人民更重要,
06:18and I the journalist represents the people and therefore I am more important the problem is that by playing these status games to win at a status game you have to put somebody else down that's why you should avoid status games而我这个记者代表人民,所以我更重要。问题是,要玩这些地位游戏、要在地位游戏中获胜,你就必须踩低别人。这就是你应该在生活中避开地位游戏的原因,
06:30in your life because they make you into an angry combative person you're always fighting to put other people down to put yourself and the people that you like up and they're always going to exist no way around it but just因为它们会让你变成一个愤怒、好斗的人。你总是为了抬高自己和自己喜欢的人而打压别人。它们永远都会存在,没办法,但
06:42realize that most of the times when you're trying to create wealth you're actually getting attacked by someone else and they're trying to look like a goody two-shoes but really what they're doing is they're trying to up their own status at只要意识到:大多数时候,当你想创造财富时,其实是有别人在攻击你,他们想显得像个道德楷模,但实际上他们是在踩着你抬高自己的地位。
06:54your expense they're just playing a different game and it's a worse game it's a zero-sum game instead of a positive sum one thing you mentioned before the interview that stuck with me was the idea that you think everyone can become他们只是在玩另一种游戏,而且是更糟的游戏,是零和游戏而不是正和游戏。你在采访前提到的一点让我印象很深,就是你认为每个人都可以
07:07rich and that perhaps some of the ways of getting rich or the idea of wealth is vilified by some people in other countries say you want to expand on that a little bit yeah I think there's this notion that making变富,而且也许有些致富方式、或者财富这个概念,被其他国家的某些人污名化了。你想展开讲讲吗?
07:22money is evil right it's like rooted all the way back down to money's the root of all evil people think that bankers steal our money and you know it's somewhat true in that in a lot of the world there's a是的,我认为存在这么一种观念:赚钱是邪恶的。它一路可以追溯到“金钱是万恶之源”。人们认为银行家偷我们的钱——某种程度上确实如此,因为在世界很多地方,
07:33lot of theft going on all the time the history of the world in some sense is this predator-prey relationship between makers and takers there are people who go out and create things and build things and work hard on things and偷窃一直在大量发生。世界的历史在某种意义上就是生产者与掠夺者之间捕食者—猎物式的关系。有些人出去创造东西、建造东西、为之努力,
07:45then they're people who come along and play with a sword or a gun or taxes or crony capitalism or communism or what-have-you there's all these different methods to steal even in nature there are more parasites than there are non parasitical然后另一些人拿着刀剑、枪炮、税收、裙带资本主义、共产主义等等过来,有各种不同的手段去偷。甚至在自然界,寄生者都比非寄生者
07:57organisms you have ton of parasites in you who are living off of you and the better ones are symbiotic they're giving something back but there are a lot that are just taking that's just the nature of how any complex system多。你体内有大量寄生者靠你活着,其中较好的那些是共生的,会回报些什么,但也有很多纯粹是在索取。任何复杂系统的构造本性如此。
08:07is built but what I am focused on is true wealth creation it's not about taking money it's not about taking something from somebody else but it's when creating abundance obviously there's not a finite number of jobs or a finite amount但我关注的是真正的财富创造,不是拿走钱,不是从别人那里拿走什么,而是创造丰盛。显然工作不是有限的,财富也不是有限的,
08:20of wealth otherwise we will still be sitting around in caves figuring out how to divide a pieces of firewood and you know the occasional dead deer so most of the wealth and civilization in fact not most all of it has否则我们今天还得坐在山洞里,琢磨怎么分几根柴火,偶尔还有只死鹿。所以文明中大部分财富——其实不是大部分,是全部——都
08:30been created and it got created from somewhere it got created from people they got created from technology a critical productivity got created from hard work so this idea that if stolen is I think this horrible zero-sum game that people who是被创造出来的,它从某处被创造出来:由人创造,由技术创造,由关键的生产力创造,由努力工作创造。所以“财富是被偷来的”这个观念,我认为是一种可怕的零和游戏,那些
08:44are trying to gain status play but the reality is everyone can be rich and we can see that by seeing that in the first world everyone is richer than almost anyone who was alive too hundred years ago 200 years ago想争夺地位的人就在玩这种游戏。但现实是每个人都可以变富,我们只要看到:在第一世界,每个人都几乎比两百年前活着的任何人都富有。而两百年前,
08:57nobody had any biotics nobody had cars nobody had electricity nobody had the iPhone so all of these things are inventions that have made us wealthier as a species today I would rather be a poor person in the first world country没人有抗生素,没人有汽车,没人有电,没人有 iPhone。所以这些都是让我们作为一个物种变得更富有的发明。今天,我宁愿做一个第一世界国家的穷人,
09:10than be a rich person in Louisa 14th France I'd rather be a poor person today than an aristocrat back then and that's just because of wealth creation the engine of technologies science that is applied for the purpose of creating abundance也不愿做路易十四时代法国的富人。我宁愿今天做个穷人,也不愿那时做个贵族,而这只是因为财富创造——技术、科学这些被用来创造丰盛的引擎。
09:23so I think fundamentally everybody can be wealthy and the thought experiment I want you to think through is imagine if everybody had the knowledge of a good software engineer and a good hardware engineer if you could go out there and所以我认为从根上说,每个人都可以富有。我希望你做一个思想实验:想象每个人都拥有一个优秀软件工程师和一个优秀硬件工程师的知识,如果你能出去
09:37you could build robots and computers and bridges and program them let's say every human knew how to do that what do you think society would look like in 20 years my guess is what would happen is we would build robots建造机器人、计算机、桥梁并给它们编程——假设每个人都懂这些,你觉得二十年后社会会是什么样?我的猜测是:我们会造出机器人、
09:50machines software and hardware to do everything and we would all be living in massive abundance we would essentially be retired in the sense that none of us would have to work for any of the basics we'd even have robotic nurses机器、软件和硬件来做一切,我们都会生活在巨大的丰盛中。我们本质上就退休了,因为没人需要为任何基本需求工作。我们甚至会有机器人护士,
10:02we have like machine driven hospitals we have self-driving cars we'd have farms that are a hundred percent automated we have clean energy so at that point we could use technology breakthroughs to get everything that we want it and if anyone会有机器驱动的医院,有自动驾驶汽车,有百分之百自动化的农场,有清洁能源。到那时,我们可以用技术突破得到想要的一切。而如果那时还有人在
10:16is still working at that point they're working as a form of expressing their creativity they're working because it's in them to contribute and to build a design things but I don't think capitalism is evil capitalism is actually good it's just工作,他们工作是为了表达创造力,他们工作是因为内心就想贡献、建造和设计东西。但我不认为资本主义是邪恶的,资本主义其实是好的。只是
10:29that it gets hijacked it gets hijacked by improper pricing of xq-- maladies it gets hijacked by improper deals where that you have corruption or you have monopolies over all capitalism is intrinsic to the human species capitalism is not something we它会被劫持:被外部性的错误定价劫持,被腐败或不正当交易劫持,被垄断劫持。资本主义是人类的本质属性,它不是我们
10:45invented capitalism is not even something we discovered it is innate to us in every exchange that we have when you and I exchange information I want some information back from you I give you information you give me information if we发明的,甚至也不是我们发现的,它与生俱来。在我们每一次交换中——当你和我交换信息,我想从你那里得到一些信息,我给你信息,你给我信息,如果
10:58weren't having a good information exchange you go talk to somebody else so the notion of exchange and keeping track of credits and debits this is built into us as flexible social animals we are the only animal in the animal kingdom我们的信息交换不够好,你就去找别人谈。所以交换的概念、记录借贷的概念,是刻在我们作为灵活的社会动物身上的。我们是动物界唯一
11:09that cooperate across genetic boundaries most animals doesn't cooperate but when they do they cooperate only in packs where they Co evolved together and they share blood so they have some shared interests humans don't have that and what lets us cooperate能跨越基因边界合作的物种。大多数动物不合作,即使合作也只在共同进化、共享血缘的群体内合作,所以有共同利益。人类没有这种条件,而让我们能合作的
11:23it's because we can keep track of debits and credits who put in how much work who contributed how much that's all free market capitalism is so I strongly believe that it is innate to the human species and we are going原因,是我们能记录谁付出了多少、谁贡献了多少的借贷账目。这就是自由市场资本主义的全部。所以我坚信它是人类的本质属性,而我们将
11:36to create more and more wealth and abundance for everybody everybody can be wealthy everybody can be retired everybody can be successful it is merely a question of Education and desire you have to want it if you don't want it that's为所有人创造越来越多的财富和丰盛。每个人都可以富有,每个人都可以退休,每个人都可以成功。这只是一个教育和意愿的问题。你必须想要它。如果你不想要,那
11:49fine then you opt out of the game but don't try and put down the people who are playing the game because that's the game that keeps you in a comfortable warm bed at night that's the game that keeps a roof也没关系,你可以退出这场游戏,但别去贬低玩游戏的人,因为正是这场游戏让你夜里睡在温暖舒适的床上,正是这场游戏让你头顶
11:59over your head that's a game that keeps your supermarket's stock that's the game that keeps the iphone buzzing in your pocket so it is a beautiful game that is worth playing ethically rationally morally socially for the human race and it's有片屋顶,正是这场游戏让你的超市货架有货,正是这场游戏让你口袋里的 iPhone 嗡嗡作响。所以这是一场美丽的游戏,在伦理上、理性上、道德上、社会层面对人类都值得去玩,而且它
12:12gonna continue to make us all richer and richer until we have massive wealth creation for anybody who wants it and it's not just individual secretly despising wealth right there's countries groups political parties that overtly despise wealth or at least seem会继续让我们所有人越来越富有,直到任何人只要想要就能获得巨大的财富创造。而且不只是个人在暗暗鄙视财富——有些国家、群体、政党公开鄙视财富,或至少看起来
12:28to that's right and so what those countries political parties and groups are reduced playing the zero-sum king of status and the process to destroy wealth creation they dragged everybody down to their which is why the u.s. is a very popular如此。没错。而那些国家、政党和群体,就沦落到玩零和的地位游戏,在这个过程中摧毁财富创造,把所有人拖到他们的水平上。这就是为什么美国是非常受欢迎的
12:41country for immigrants because it's the American dream anyone can come here pretty poor and then work really hard and make money and get wealthy but even just make some basic money for their obviously the definition of wealth is different for移民国家,因为有美国梦:任何人都可以来到这里,本来很穷,然后拼命工作、赚钱、变富,哪怕只是赚到一些基本的钱。当然,财富的定义对
12:53different people a first of all citizens definition of wealth might be oh I have to make millions of dollars and I'm completely done where's to a third-world poor immigrant just entering the country and we were poor immigrants who came here不同人是不一样的。一个第一世界公民对财富的定义可能是“我得赚到几百万美元才算彻底完成”;而对一个刚进入这个国家的第三世界贫穷移民来说——而我们就是贫穷移民,来到
13:03when I was fairly young to the United States wealth may just be a much lower number it may just be that I don't have to work a manual labor job for the rest of my life that I don't want work美国时我还很小——财富可能就是一个低得多的数字,可能只是“我这辈子不用再做体力劳动”。
13:11but groups that despise it will essentially bring the entire group down to that level if you get too many takers and not enough makers society falls apart you're in with a communist country look with Venezuela right they were so busy但鄙视财富的群体会把整个群体拖到那个水平。如果索取者太多、创造者太少,社会就会崩解。你去共产主义国家看看,看看委内瑞拉:他们忙着
13:24taking and dividing and reallocating that people are literally starving in the streets and losing kilograms of body weight every year just do sheer starvation another way think about it imagine an organism that has too many parasites you actually need some拿取、分配、再分配,结果人们在街上真的在挨饿,每年因为纯粹的饥饿掉好几公斤体重。换个角度想:想象一个寄生者过多的生物体,其实你需要
13:39small number of parasites to stay healthy and you need a lot of symbols like all the mitochondria in all of our cells that help us respirate and burn oxygen these are symbols that help us survive we can survive without them少量的寄生者来保持健康,同时你需要大量共生体,比如我们所有细胞里的线粒体,帮我们呼吸、燃烧氧气。这些是帮助我们生存的共生体,没有它们我们活不下去,
13:52but to me those are partners in the wealth creation that creates the human body but if you just were filled with parasites if you've got infected with worms or a virus or bacteria that were purely parasitical you would die so但在我看来,它们是创造人体这个财富的伙伴。可如果你体内塞满寄生者——感染了纯粹寄生的蠕虫、病毒或细菌——你就会死。所以
14:05any organism can only withstand a small number of parasites and when the parasitic element gets too far out of control you die so you know that again I'm talking about ethical wealth patient and the time when monopolies and that I'm任何生物体都只能承受少量寄生者,一旦寄生因素失控,你就会死。所以你知道,我再一次说的是合乎伦理的财富创造,而垄断那类东西,我
14:18not promoting capitalism I'm gonna talk about miss price externalities like the environment I'm talking about free minds and free markets small steel exchange between humans that's voluntary and doesn't have an outsize impact on others but I think that kind of不是在推崇资本主义,我要说的是像环境这样的外部性定价错误。我说的是自由的心智和自由的市场,人与人之间小规模、自愿、不对他人造成过度影响的交换。但我认为那种
14:30wealth creation if a society does not respect it the group does not respect it that society will plunge into ruin and darkness obviously we want to be wealthy and we want to get there in this lifetime without having to rely财富创造,如果社会不尊重它、群体不尊重它,那个社会就会陷入毁灭和黑暗。显然我们想变富,而且想在这一生中做到,不必依赖
14:42on luck a lot of people think making money is about luck it's not it's about becoming the kind of person that makes money you know I like to think that if I lost all my money and if you drop me运气。很多人认为赚钱靠运气,不是的,它靠的是成为那种会赚钱的人。我喜欢这样想:如果我失去所有钱,你把我丢在任何一个英语国家的随机一条街上,
14:53on a random street in any english-speaking country within five ten years I'd be wealthy again right because it's just a skill set that I've developed and I think anyone can develop you know in a thousand parallel universes you want to五到十年内我会再次富有。因为这是一套我发展出来的技能组合,而我认为任何人都能发展出来。在一千个平行宇宙里,你希望
15:06be wealthy in 999 of them you don't want to be wealthy the 50 of them where you got lucky so we want to factor luck out of it there's really four kinds of luck that we were talking about this came在其中的 999 个里都变富。你不希望只有其中 50 个靠运气。所以我们要把运气这个因素排除掉。运气其实有四种,我们聊过,这
15:16from a book P marca Marc Andreessen wrote a blog post about it but there's different kinds of luck the first kind of luck he might just say is that blind luck where I just got lucky because something completely out of来自一本书,Marc Andreessen 为此写过一篇博客文章。运气分不同的种类。第一种,也许可以直接说是盲目的运气,就是我纯粹走运,因为某件完全不在
15:29my control happened you know that's fortune that's fate etc then there's luck that comes through persistence hard work soeul motion which is when you're just running around creating lots of opportunities you're generating a lot of energy you're doing a lot我控制范围内的事发生了。那是好运、那是命。然后是靠坚持、努力、运动带来的运气——就是你在到处跑、创造大量机会、产生大量能量、做很多
15:41of things lots of things will just get stirred up in the dust it's almost like mixing a petri dish and seeing what combines or mixing a bunch of reagents and seeing what combines you're just generally in a force and hustle事情,很多事情会在尘土中被搅动起来。几乎就像搅拌一个培养皿,看什么会结合;或者混合一堆试剂,看什么会结合。你整个人处在一种力量、拼劲
15:54and energy that luck will find you a third way is that you just become very good at spotting luck so if you are very skilled in a field you will notice when a lucky break happens in that field and other和能量之中,运气会找到你。第三种方式是:你变得非常擅长发现运气。如果你在某个领域非常熟练,那个领域出现幸运的突破时你会注意到,而其他
16:07people who aren't attuned to it won't notice so you become sensitive to luck and that's the skill and knowledge and work and then the last kind of luck is the weirdest hardest kind but that's what we want to talk about不适应它的人不会注意到。所以你对运气变得敏感,那是技能、知识和努力。最后一种运气是最奇怪、最难的一种,但正是我们要谈的,
16:18which is where you build a unique character a unique brand a unique mindset where then luck finds you for example let's say that you're the best person in the world at deep-sea underwater diving and you're known to like take on就是:你打造出独特的品格、独特的品牌、独特的心智,然后运气来找你。举个例子,假设你是世界上最好的深海潜水员,以承接
16:35Deep Sea underwater dives that nobody else will even attempt to dare and then by sheer luck somebody finds a sunken treasure ship off the coast they can't get at well their luck just became your luck because they're gonna come to没人敢尝试的深海潜水闻名。然后纯属偶然,有人在海岸外发现了一艘沉没的宝船,他们拿不到。于是他们的运气变成了你的运气,因为他们会来找
16:49you to get that treasure and you're gonna get paid for it now that's an extreme example but it's just showing how like the person who got lucky but find the treasure chest that was blind luck but then coming to you你打捞那批宝藏,而你会因此获得报酬。这是个极端的例子,但它说明了:发现宝箱的人得到的是盲目运气,但后来他来找你,
16:59and asking you to extract it and having to give you half that's not luck you created your own luck you put yourself in a position to be able to capitalize on that luck or to attract that luck when nobody else请你把它打捞上来,并且不得不分你一半——那不是运气。你创造了自己的运气,你把自己放在了一个能够利用那种运气、或者吸引那种运气的位置上,而其他人
17:09has created that opportunity for themselves so when we talked about without getting lucky we want to be deterministic we don't want to leave it to chance do you want to elaborate a little bit more on the idea that in a从没为自己创造过那样的机会。所以当我们说“不靠运气”时,我们希望它是确定性的,不想把它交给偶然。你愿意再多讲讲这个想法吗——在一千个
17:20thousand parallel universes you want to get rich in 999 of them I think some people are going to see that and say that sounds impossible sounds like it's too good to be true no I don't think it's impossible I think平行宇宙里,你想在 999 个里都变富。我想有些人看到会说这听起来不可能,听起来好得不像真的。不,我不认为它不可能。我认为
17:33that you may have to work a little bit harder at it given your starting circumstances I mean remember I started as a poor kid in India right so if I can make it anybody can in that sense now obviously I取决于你的起点,你可能要更努力一点。记住,我是从印度一个穷孩子开始的,所以如果我能做到,任何人都能做到。当然,
17:44had all my limbs and I had my mental faculties and I did have an education so there are some prerequisites you can't get past but if you're listening to this video or podcasts you probably have the requisite means at your我四肢健全、心智正常,而且确实受过教育,所以有一些无法绕过的前提条件。但如果你在看这个视频或听这个播客,你大概已经拥有必要的条件:
17:56disposal which is a functioning body and a functioning mind and I have encountered plenty of bad luck along the way first a little fortune that I made I instantly lost in the stock market the second little fortune that I made一副能运转的身体和一个能运转的心智。而且我一路也遇到很多坏运气。我赚到的第一笔小钱,立刻在股市里亏光了;我赚到的第二笔小钱,
18:06or I should have made I got cheated by my business partners it's only the third time around has been a charm and even then it has been a slow and steady struggle and I haven't made money in my life in或者说本应赚到的,被我的商业伙伴骗走了。只有第三次才算顺利,即便那样也是一场缓慢而稳定的挣扎。我这辈子赚钱从来不是
18:18one giant payout it's always been a whole bunch of small things piling up so it's more about consistently creating wealth by creating businesses and quitting opportunities and creating investments it hasn't been like a giant one-off thing my personal wealth has一笔巨大的进账,永远是一大堆小事累积起来。所以更多是靠持续创造财富——创建企业、抓住机会、做投资,而不是某个一次性的大事件。我的个人财富
18:33not been generated by one a big year it just stacks up little bit chips at a time more options more businesses more investments more things that can do same way someone like in a gala service he's building his brand online不是某一个大年份产生的,它是一次一小块地堆起来的:更多选择、更多生意、更多投资、更多能做的事。就像 AngelList 的某个人,他在网上打造自己的品牌,
18:46he's building videos it's not like any one video is going to suddenly shower him with riches overnight it's going to be a long lifetime of learning of reading of creating this is gonna compound so we're talking about getting wealthy so做视频。不是哪一个视频会一夜之间让他暴富,而是长期的学习、阅读、创造,这会产生复利。所以我们谈的是变富,
19:02you can retire so you have your freedom I'm not retired a sense that you don't do anything but in the sense that you don't have to be any place you don't want to be you don't have to do anything you好让你能退休、拥有自由。我所说的退休不是什么都不做,而是你不必待在不想待的地方,不必做你
19:09don't want to do and you can wake up when you want you can sleep and you want you don't have a boss that's freedom so we're talking about enough wealth to get to freedom and especially thanks to the Internet these不想做的事,你可以想什么时候起就什么时候起,想睡就睡,没有老板——这就是自由。所以我们说的是足够多、能换来自由的财富。尤其多亏了互联网,
19:19days those opportunities are massively abundant I in fact have too many ways to make money I don't have enough time I literally have opportunities pouring out of my ears and the thing I keep running out of this time there's just如今这些机会极其丰富。事实上我赚钱的方式太多了,时间不够用。机会简直从我耳朵里往外冒,我一直不够用的就是时间。
19:32so many ways to create wealth to create products to create businesses to create opportunities and to as a by-product get paid by society that I just can't even handle it all I think it's pretty interesting that the first three kinds创造财富、创造产品、创造企业、创造机会的方式太多,而作为副产品被社会支付报酬,我根本应付不过来。我觉得挺有意思的是,你描述的前三种
19:45of luck that you described there are very common cliches for them that everybody knows and then for that last kind of luck that comes to you out of the unique way that you act there's no real cliche for it so运气都有非常常见的俗语,人人都知道;而最后一种运气,来自你独特的行事方式,却没有什么真正的俗语。所以
19:59for the first three kinds there is dumb luck or fine luck that's the first kind of luck the second kind of luck does the cliche that fortune favors the bold that's a person who gets lucky just by stirring the pot前三种:有“傻人有傻福”或纯粹运气,那是第一种;第二种运气对应的俗语是“幸运眷顾勇者”,就是那种靠搅动锅子
20:11and acting the third kind of luck people say that chance favors the prepared mind but for the fourth kind of luck there is not really a common cliche out there that matches the unique character of your action which i think和行动获得运气的人;第三种运气,人们说“机会眷顾有准备的头脑”;但对第四种运气,并没有真正常见的俗语能对应你行动的独特品格,我觉得
20:27is interesting and perhaps an opportunity and it also just shows that people aren't necessarily taking advantage of that kind of luck the way they should be I think also at that point it starts becoming so deterministic that it stops being这很有意思,也许还是机会,也说明人们未必在以应有的方式利用那种运气。我还觉得到那个阶段,它开始变得如此确定,以至于不再是
20:41luck so the definition starts fading from luck to more destiny so I would characterize that fourth one is you build your character in a certain way and then your character becomes your destiny one of the things I think that is运气。定义开始从运气淡化,更像命运。所以我会把第四种定义为:你以某种方式塑造品格,然后你的品格成为你的命运。我认为有一件事
20:55important to making money when you want the kind of reputation that makes people do deals through you you know I use the example of like if you're a great diver then treasure hunters will come and give you a piece of对赚钱很重要,就是你想要那种名声,让人愿意通过你做交易。我用的例子是:如果你是出色的潜水员,寻宝人会来找你,分你一份
21:07the treasure for your diving skills if you're a trusted reliable high integrity long-term thinking deal maker then when other people want to do deals but they don't know how to do them in a trustworthy manner with strangers they will literally宝藏,作为你潜水技能的报酬。如果你是可信、可靠、高诚信、长期思考的交易撮合者,当别人想做交易、却不知道如何与陌生人以可信的方式做成时,他们会真的
21:21approach you and give you a cut of the deal or offer you a unique deal just because of the integrity and reputation that you've built up Warren Buffett he gets offered deals and he gets to buy companies and he gets来找你,给你一笔分成,或者仅仅因为你建立的诚信和声誉,就给你一个独特的交易。Warren Buffett 会被人送上交易,他能收购公司、
21:32to file warrants and bail out banks and do things that other people can't do because of his reputation but of course that's fragile it has accountability on the line it has a strong brand on the line and as we will能认购权证、能救银行,做别人做不到的事,因为他的声誉。当然这很脆弱,它押上了问责,押上了强大的品牌,而且正如我们
21:43talk about later that comes with accountability attached but I would say your character your reputation these are things that you can build that then will let you take out advantages of opportunities that other people may characterize as lucky but you后面会谈到的,这伴随问责而来。但我想说,你的品格、你的声誉,是你可以建立的东西,它们让你能够利用别人可能称之为运气的机会,但你
21:57know that it wasn't luck you said that this fourth kind of luck is more or less a destiny there's a quote from that original book that was in Mark's blog posts from Benjamin Disraeli who I think was the former prime知道那不是运气。你说过第四种运气多多少少是一种命运。原书里有一句话,也出现在 Marc 的博客文章里,出自 Benjamin Disraeli,我想他是英国前
22:13minister of the UK the quote to describe the kind of luck was we make our fortunes and we call them fate there were a couple other interesting things about this kind of luck that were mentioned in the blog post I首相。用来描述这种运气的话是:“我们创造自己的财富,然后称之为命运。”那篇博客文章里还提到几件关于这种运气的有趣的事,我
22:25think it'll be good for the listeners to hear about is that this fourth kind of luck can almost come out of eccentric ways that you do your things and that eccentricity is not necessarily a bad thing in this case in觉得听众听听会有收获:这第四种运气几乎可以来自你做事时古怪的方式,而这种古怪在这种情况下未必是坏事,
22:39fact it's a good thing yeah absolutely because the world is a very efficient place so everyone has dug through all the obvious places to dig and so to find something that's new and novel and uncovered it helps to be operating事实上是好事。是的,绝对如此。因为世界是一个非常高效的地方,每个显而易见的地方都被人挖过了,所以要找到新的、新颖的、未被发现的东西,你得在前沿
22:52on a frontier where right there you have to be a little eccentric to be out on the frontier by yourself and then you just have to be willing to dig deeper than other people do deeper than seems irrational just because上运作。在前沿,你必须有点古怪,才能独自待在那里;然后你必须愿意比别人挖得更深,深到看起来不理性的程度,只是因为
23:03you're interested yeah the two quotes that I've seen that expressed this kind of luck in addition to that Benjamin Disraeli one are this one from Sam Altman where he said extreme people get extreme results I think that's pretty nice and你感兴趣。是的。我见过的、除 Benjamin Disraeli 那句之外,表达这种运气的两句名言:一句来自 Sam Altman,他说“极端的人得到极端的结果”,我觉得说得很好;
23:18then there's this other one from Jeffrey Pfeffer who is a professor at Stanford that you can't be normal and expect abnormal returns I've always enjoyed that one too yeah and one quote that I like which is the exact opposite of另一句来自斯坦福教授 Jeffrey Pfeffer,他说“你不可能做个正常人,却期待不正常的回报”。我一直很喜欢那句。我也喜欢一句意思正好相反的:
23:32that is play stupid games win stupid prizes all right a lot of people spend a lot of their time playing social games like on Twitter where you're just trying to improve your social standing and you basically win stupid social prizes“玩愚蠢的游戏,赢愚蠢的奖品”。很多人花大量时间玩社交游戏,比如在 Twitter 上,你只是想提高社会地位,结果你基本上赢得了愚蠢的社交奖品,
23:45which are worthless I guess the last thing that I have from this blog post is just the idea that by pursuing these kinds of luck especially the last one basically everything but dumb luck by pursuing them you essentially run out而那些毫无价值。我猜我从这篇博客文章里得到的最后一点是:通过追求这些运气,尤其是最后一种——基本上除了盲目运气之外的所有运气——通过追求它们,你实际上会把坏运气耗尽。
24:01of unlock so if you just keep stirring the pot and stirring the pot that alone you will run out of unlock yeah or it could just be reversion to the mean right so then you at least neutralize luck so that所以如果你只是不停搅锅、搅锅,光是这样你就会把坏运气用光。或者也可能只是均值回归,对,所以你至少把运气中性化了,这样
24:14it's your own talents that come into play next you go into more specific details on how you can actually get rich and how you can't get rich the first point was about how you're not going to get rich renting of接下来发挥作用的就是你自己的才能。接下来你更具体地讲了你怎么才能真正致富、以及怎么不能致富。第一点是:你不可能靠出租
24:28your time you must own equity up piece of the business to gain your financial freedom this is probably one of the absolute most important points people seem to think that you can create wealth and make money through work and it's自己的时间致富。你必须拥有股权,拥有一块业务,才能获得财务自由。这大概是整条推文串里绝对最重要的一点。人们似乎以为可以通过工作创造财富、赚钱,但这
24:42probably not going to work there are many reasons for that but the most basic is just that your inputs are very closely tied to your outputs in almost any salary job even at one that's paying a lot per hour like大概行不通。原因很多,但最基本的只是:在几乎任何拿薪水的工作里,你的投入和产出紧密相连——即使是时薪很高的工作,比如
24:54a lawyer or a doctor you're still putting in the hours and every hour you get paid so what that means is when you're sleeping you're not earning when you're retired you're not earning when you're in vacation you're not earning and律师或医生。你仍然在投入小时数,每个小时拿钱。这意味着你睡觉时不赚钱,退休后不赚钱,度假时不赚钱,
25:06you can't earn nonlinearly if you look at even doctors who get rich like really rich it's because they open a business they open like a private practice and then private practice builds a brand and that brand attracts people or they你无法非线性地赚钱。你看看那些真正变富的医生,是因为他们开了生意,开了私人诊所,诊所建立品牌、品牌吸引人;或者他们
25:17build some kind of medical device or a procedure or a process where they've intellectual property so essentially you're working for somebody else and that person is taking on the risk and has the accountability and the intellectual property and the brand做出某种医疗设备、某项手术或流程,拥有知识产权。所以本质上你在为别人工作,而那个人承担风险、承担问责、拥有知识产权和品牌,
25:29so they're just not gonna pay you enough they're gonna pay you the bare minimum that they have to to get you good a job and that can be a high bare minimum but it's still not gonna be true wealth where所以他们不会付给你足够的钱。他们只会付必须付的最低限度,让你把活干好。那可能是很高的最低限度,但仍然不是那种让你
25:39you're retired and then finally you're actually just not even creating that much original for society like I said this tweets term should have been called how to create wealth it's just how to get rich with a more catchy title but可以退休的真正财富。最后,你其实根本没有为社会创造多少原创的东西。就像我说的,这条推文串本应叫“如何创造财富”,“如何致富”只是更抓人的标题,但
25:50you're not creating new things for society you're just doing things over and over and you're essentially replaceable because you're now doing a set role most set roles can be taught if they can be taught like in a school then eventually你并没有为社会创造新东西,你只是一遍遍重复做事,本质上你可被替换,因为你在做一个固定角色。大多数固定角色是可以被教的。如果一件事能在学校里教,那么最终
26:03you'll be competing with someone who's got more recent knowledge who's been taught and is coming in to replace you you're much more likely to be doing a job that can be eventually replaced by a robot or by an AI and你就会和一个拥有更新知识、刚被教出来、正准备取代你的人竞争。你也更可能在做一份最终会被机器人或 AI 取代的工作。
26:15it doesn't have to be a wholesale replaced overnight Akemi replace a little bit of a time and that eats into your wealth creation and therefore you're earning capability so fundamentally your inputs are matched to your outputs you are replaceable and而且不一定要一夜之间整体被取代,它可以一点一点被取代,这会侵蚀你的财富创造,也就侵蚀你的赚钱能力。所以从根本上说,你的投入与产出匹配,你可被替换,
26:29you're not being creative I just don't think that that is the way that you can truly make money so everybody who really makes money at some point owns a piece of a product or a business or some kind of IP而且你没有创造力。我就是不认为那是你真正赚钱的方式。所以每个真正赚到钱的人,在某个时点都拥有一部分产品、企业或某种知识产权。
26:40that can be through stock options so if you be working a tech company that's a fine way to start but usually the real wealth is created by starting your own companies or by you know even investors there in an investment那可以通过股票期权实现。如果你在一家科技公司工作,那是个不错的起点,但真正的财富通常来自创办自己的公司,或者甚至做投资人——他们做投资
26:53for them and they're buying equity so these are much more the routes to wealth it doesn't come to the hours you really just want a job or a career or profession where your inputs don't matter your outputs so if you并买入股权。所以这些才是更主要的致富路径。它不来自小时数。你真正想要的是一份工作、职业或专业,在其中你的投入不影响你的产出。所以如果你
27:05look at modern society I get into later in the tweet storm businesses that have high creativity and high leverage tends to be ones where you could do an hour of work and it can have a huge effect or you can看看现代社会——我后面在推文串里会讲到——高创造力、高杠杆的生意,往往是那种你工作一小时就能产生巨大效果,或者你工作
27:16do a thousand hours of working can have no effect for example look at software engineering one great engineer can for example create Bitcoin and create billions of dollars with the value an engineer who's working on the wrong thing or not一千小时也可能毫无效果的。比如软件工程:一个伟大的工程师可以创造出 Bitcoin,创造数十亿美元的价值;而一个做错方向、不够好、或者不够有创造力、不够深思的工程师,可以干整整一年,
27:28quite as good or just not a creative or thoughtful or whatever can work for an entire year and every piece of code they ship and whatnot getting used customers don't want it that is an example of a profession where the交付的每一行代码、每一样东西,客户都不想要。这就是一种职业的例子——投入与产出高度脱节,它不取决于你投入的小时数。
27:41input and the outputs are highly disconnected it's not based on the number of hours that you put in whereas on the extreme other end if you're a lumberjack even the best lumberjack in the world assuming they're not working with tools而在另一个极端,如果你是伐木工,即使是世界上最好的伐木工——假设不用工具,
27:51so the inputs and outputs really connected they're just using an axe or a saw the best lumberjack in the world maybe like 3x better than one of the worst Lumberjacks right it's not going to be a gigantic difference so you那么投入和产出是真正相连的。他们只用斧头或锯子,世界上最好的伐木工也许只比最差的强三倍,不会有巨大的差别。所以
28:02want to look for professions and careers where the inputs and the outputs are highly disconnected this is another way of saying that you want to look for things that are leveraged and by leverage I don't mean financial leverage alone like你要寻找那种投入与产出高度脱节的职业和事业。换句话说,你要找有杠杆的东西。而说到杠杆,我不是只指华尔街用、名声不好的金融杠杆,
28:14Wall Street uses and that has a bad name I'm just talking about tools we're using tools computer is a tool that software engineers use if I'm a lumberjack with bulldozers and automatic robot axes and saws I'm gonna be using tools我说的是工具。我们在使用工具,计算机是软件工程师用的工具。如果我这个伐木工有推土机、自动机械斧和锯子,我就在用工具,
28:27and have more leverage than someone who's just using his bare hand and try to rip the trees out by their roots tools and leverage are what create this disconnection between inputs and outputs creativity so the higher the creativity component of就比只用手、试图把树连根拔起的人拥有更多杠杆。工具和杠杆正是造成投入与产出脱节、以及创造力差异的原因。所以一个职业中创造力成分越高,
28:40a profession the more likely it is to have disconnected inputs and outputs so I think that if you're looking at professions where you're inputting your outputs are highly connected it's gonna be very very very hard to create wealth and make它的投入和产出就越可能脱节。所以我认为,如果你看的职业里投入和产出高度相连,那么在这个过程中创造财富、为自己积累财富会非常非常非常难。
28:53wealth for yourself in that process any other big thing you should avoid other than renting out your time yeah there are two tweets that I put out that are related so the first one is talking about beer or something like除了出租时间之外,还有什么大的东西要避免?对,我发过两条相关的推文。第一条讲的是啤酒还是什么,讲的是
29:05how it your lifestyle you know has to upgrade shouldn't get upgraded too fast and that one said people who are living far below their means enjoy your freedom that people busy upgrading their lifestyles just can't fathom and I think that's你的生活方式不应升级得太快。那条说:那些生活水平远低于收入的人,享受着那些忙着升级生活方式的人根本无法想象的自由。我觉得这
29:18very important like just to not upgrade your lifestyle all the time to maintain your freedom and it just gives your freedom of operation once you make a little bit of money you still want to be living like your old self非常重要:不要一直升级生活方式,以保住你的自由。它给你操作上的自由:一旦你赚了点钱,你仍然想活得像个旧的自己,
29:28so that's just the worry goes away so don't want to upgrade that house lifestyle and all that stuff let's say you're gonna get a thousand dollars an hour the problem is that when you go into a work lifestyle like that这样担忧就消失了。所以不要升级房子、生活方式那些东西。假设你将来能一小时赚一千美元,问题是,当你进入那样的工作状态时,
29:40you don't just suddenly go from making twenty dollars an hour to making a thousand dollars an hour that's a progression over a long career and as that happens one subtle problem is that you upgrade your lifestyle as you make more你不是突然从一小时赚二十美元跳到一小时赚一千美元,那是漫长职业生涯中的渐进过程。而在这个过程中,一个微妙的问题是,随着你赚得越多,
29:52and more money and that upgrading of the lifestyle ups what you consider to be wealth and you stay in this wage slave trap so I forget who said it maybe it was nothing too late but he said you know the你就越会升级生活方式,而生活方式的升级会抬高你所认为的“财富”门槛,于是你困在工资奴隶的陷阱里。我忘了是谁说的,也许是 Naval 说的——他说,
30:02most dangerous things are heroin and a monthly salary right because they're highly addictive the way you want to get wealthy is you want to be poor and working and working and this is for example how the tech industry works well最危险的东西是海洛因和月薪,因为它们都极易上瘾。你想变富的方式,是先穷着、工作、再工作。比如科技行业就是这样:
30:15you don't make any money for ten years and then suddenly in year 11 you might have a giant payday which is what by the way one reason why these very high marginal tax rates for the so-called wealthy or flawed because你十年不赚钱,然后突然在第 11 年可能有一笔巨大的进账。顺便说一句,这也是为什么对所谓富人的极高边际税率是有问题的,因为
30:24the highest risk taking most creative professions literally lose money for a decade over your life while you take massive risk and you bleed and bleed and then suddenly in year 11 or year 15 you might have one single big payday风险最高、最有创造力的职业,实际上在你的人生中会有十年在亏钱,你承担巨大风险,不断流血、流血,然后突然在第 11 年或第 15 年,你可能有了一笔巨大的进账,
30:37but then of course Uncle Sam show up and say hey you know what you just made a lot of money this year therefore you're rich therefore you're evil and you got to hand it all over to us so it just但当然,山姆大叔出现了,说:嘿,你今年赚了很多钱,所以你是富人,所以你是邪恶的,你得把这一切都交给我们。所以这
30:47destroys those kinds of creative risk-taking professions but ideally you want to make your money in discrete lumps separated over long periods of time so that your own lifestyle does not have a chance to adapt quickly and then you can say摧毁了这类有创造力的、承担风险的职业。理想情况下,你要把赚钱分成离散的块,间隔很长时间,这样你的生活方式来不及迅速适应,然后你可以说:
31:01okay now I'm done now I'm retired now I'm free I'm still gonna work because you got to do something with your life but I'm gonna work on only the things that I want when I want and to be much more好了,现在我完成了,我退休了,我自由了。我仍然会工作,因为你总得用你的人生做点什么,但我只做我想做的、在我想做的时候做,更多是
31:12creative expression and much less about money you're not going to get rich renting out your time but you say that you will get rich by giving society what it wants but does not yet know how to get at scale that's创造性的表达,而不是为了钱。你不会靠出租时间变富,但你说,你会靠给社会提供它想要、但还不知道怎么大规模获得的东西而变富。这
31:26right so essentially I could we talked about before money is IO used from society saying you did something good in the past now here's something that we owe you for the future and so society will pay you for creating things没错。本质上——我们之前谈过——金钱是社会给你的欠条,说你过去做了好事,现在我们欠你一些未来的东西。所以社会会为你的创造付钱,
31:40that it wants but society doesn't yet know how to create those things because if it did it would need you they would already be stamped out big time almost everything is in your house and your workplace and on the street只要你创造的是它想要、但它还不知道怎么创造的东西。因为如果它会创造,那就不需要你了,早就会被大量生产出来。你家、你工作场所、街上几乎所有的东西,
31:53used to be technology at one point in time at the time when oil was technology that made JD rockefeller rich there's a time when cars were technology that made Henry Ford rich so technology is just a set of things as都曾是某个时点的技术。石油曾是技术,让 John D. Rockefeller 变富;汽车曾是技术,让 Henry Ford 变富。所以技术只是一组东西,
32:04Alan Kay said that don't quite work yet once something works is no longer technology so society always wants new things and if you want to be wealthy you want to figure out which one of those things you can provide for按 Alan Kay 的说法——还不完全管用的东西。一旦某样东西管用了,它就不再是技术了。所以社会永远想要新东西。如果你想富有,你就要找出这些东西里哪一样
32:18society that it does not yet know how to get but it will want that's natural to you and within your skill set within your capabilities and then you have to figure out to scale it because if you just build one是你能提供给社会的——它还不知道怎么获得,但它会想要;它对你来说是自然的,在你的技能和能力的范围内。然后你必须想办法把它规模化,因为如果你只做出一个,
32:29of it that's not enough you gotta build thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions or billions of them so everybody can have one Steve Jobs and his team of course figured out that society would want smart phones computer in their那不够,你得做出成千上万个、几十万、几百万甚至几十亿个,让每个人都能有一个。Steve Jobs 和他的团队当然就看明白了:社会会想要一台装在口袋里的智能手机,
32:40pocket that had all the phone capability times a hundred and be easy to use so they figured out how to build that and then they figured out how to scale it and they figured out how to get one into every具备所有电话功能再乘以一百倍,而且好用。所以他们想办法把它造出来,然后想办法规模化,想办法让每一个
32:50first world citizens pocket and eventually every third world citizen to and so because of that they're heavily rewarded an Apple is the most valuable company in the world the way I tried to put it was that the entrepreneurs job is第一世界公民的口袋里都有一台,最终让每一个第三世界公民也有。正因如此,他们得到丰厚回报,Apple 成为世界上最有价值的公司。我试着这样表述:创业者的工作就是
33:03to try to bring the high-end to the mass market it starts as high-end first it starts as an act of creativity first you create just because you want it you want it and you know how to build it and you把高端带入大众市场。它从高端开始,首先是一种创造行为。你先创造,只因为你想要它,你想要它,而你知道怎么造它,
33:16need it and so you build it for yourself then you figure out how to get it to other people and then for a little while rich people have it like for example rich people had then they had black town cars你需要它,所以你为自己造出来。然后你弄明白怎么把它带给别人;接着有一段时间,富人拥有它,比如富人那时有黑色豪华轿车,
33:26and then uber came along and everyone's private driver it was available to everybody and now you can even see Ober pools that are replacing shuttle buses because it's more convenient and then you get scooters which are even further down market然后 Uber 出现了,每个人的私人司机对所有人都可用。现在你甚至能看到 Uber Pool 在取代穿梭巴士,因为它更方便;再往下还有滑板车,更下沉的市场,
33:37of that so you're right it's about distributing what rich people used to have to everybody but the entrepreneurs job starts even before that which is creation entrepreneurship is essentially an act of creating something new from scratch predicting the society will由此再往下。所以你说得对,关键是把富人曾经拥有的东西分发给所有人。但创业者的工作开始得更早,那就是创造。创业本质上是从零创造新事物,预测社会
33:52want it and then figuring out how to scale it and get it to everybody in a profitable way in a self-sustaining way let's look at this next tweet which I thought was cryptic and also super interesting about the kind of会想要它,然后想办法规模化,以有利可图、自我维持的方式把它带给所有人。我们来看看下一条推文,我觉得它很晦涩,也很有意思,讲的是你可能从事的
34:05job or career that you might have you said the Internet has massively broaden the possible space of careers most people haven't figured this out yet the fundamental property of the internet more than any other single thing is it connects every工作或职业。你说:互联网极大地拓宽了职业的可能空间,大多数人还没弄明白这一点。互联网最根本的属性,超过其他任何单一事物,就是它把地球上每个人
34:20human to each other human on the planet you can now reach everyone whether it's by emailing them personally lettuce by broadcast into them on Twitter whether it's by posting something on Facebook that they find whether it's by putting up a与每个人连接起来。你现在可以触达任何人:可以给人私下发邮件,可以在 Twitter 上广播,可以在 Facebook 上发点东西让他们看到,也可以做个
34:32website they come in access it connects everyone to everyone so the Internet is an inter networking tool it connects everybody that is its superpower so you want to use that what that helps you figure out is that the internet means网站让他们来访问。它把每个人连到每个人。所以互联网是一个互联工具,它连接所有人,这就是它的超能力。所以你要利用这一点。它帮你弄明白的是:互联网意味着
34:47that you can find your audience for your product or your talent and skill no matter how far away they are for example may not who's illustrators if he was in these videos pre-internet how would he get the message out there无论你的受众离你多远,你都能为你的产品、天赋和技能找到他们。比如 Mike,他是插画师,如果他在互联网之前做这些视频,他怎么把信息传出去?
34:59it would just be what would he do he would run around where he lives in his neighborhood showing it to people a computer or a screen or he would try to get it played in his local movie theater it was他会怎么做?他会在他住的街区到处跑,给人看,一台电脑或者一块屏幕;或者他试着让它在本地电影院播放。那
35:08impossible it only works because he can put it on the Internet and then how many people in the world are really interested in it or even interested in what we're talking about really gonna absorb it right it's gonna be a不可能。它之所以成立,只因为能把它放到网上。而世界上真正对它感兴趣的人有多少?甚至对我们正在聊的这些内容感兴趣、真的会吸收的人有多少?那会是
35:17very small subset of humanity the key is being able to reach them so what the internet does is allows any niche obsession which could be just the weirdest thing it could be like people who collect snakes they're like people who人类中非常小的一部分。关键在于能够触达他们。所以互联网做的是:让任何一种小众痴迷——哪怕是最古怪的东西——都能找到人。可以是收集蛇的人,可以是
35:29like to ride hot-air balloons the people who like to sail around the world by themselves just one person on a craft or someone who's obsessed with miniature cooking like there's this whole Japanese nature cooking phenomenon or there's a show about喜欢坐热气球的人,可以是喜欢独自环球航行的人——一个人一条船;或者痴迷微型烹饪的人,比如日本那整个微型烹饪现象;或者有个节目讲
35:40a woman goes in people's houses and tidies it up right so whatever niche obsession you have the Internet allows of the scale now that's not to say that what you build will be the next Facebook reach billions of users but一个女人走进别人家里帮忙整理。所以无论你有什么小众痴迷,互联网都让它规模化。这不是说你做的东西会成为下一个 Facebook、触达几十亿用户,但
35:51if you just want to reach 50,000 passionate people like you there's an audience out there for you so the beauty of this is that we have 7 billion beings on this planet the combinatorial of human DNA are incredible everyone is如果你只想触达五万个和你有同样热情的同类,那样的受众是存在的。美妙之处在于,这个星球上有七十亿人,人类 DNA 的组合是惊人的,每个人
36:04completely different you'll never meet any two people who are even vaguely similar to each other that can substitute for each other it's not you can say well maybe just left my life so I can have this other person come in都完全不同。你永远不会遇到两个哪怕隐约相似、可以相互替代的人。你不能说“也许我结束我的人生,让另一个人进来,
36:13and he's just like maybe and I get the same feelings let's say in responses and the same ideas no there are no substitutes for people are completely unique so given that each person has different skill sets different interests different obsessions他大概跟我差不多,我会得到同样的感受、同样的回应、同样的想法”。不,人是完全独特的,没有替代品。所以既然每个人都有不同的技能、不同的兴趣、不同的痴迷,
36:26and it's that diversity that becomes a creative superpower so each person can be creatively superb at their own unique thing but before that didn't matter because if you were living a little fishing village in Italy like your fishing village didn't正是这种多样性成为创造的超级能力。每个人都可以在自己的独特之处上创造性地卓越。但以前这无关紧要,因为如果你住在意大利一个小渔村,你的渔村
36:40literally need your completely unique skill and you had to conform to just a few jobs that were available but now today you can be completely unique you can go out on the internet and you can find your audience and you根本不需要你那完全独特的技能,你必须服从于仅有的几份可做的工作。但今天,你可以完全独特,你可以上网,找到你的受众,
36:52can build a business and create a product and build wealth and make people happy just uniquely expressing yourself through the internet space of careers has been so broaden eSports players people making millions of dollars x fortnight people creating videos and建立生意、创造产品、积累财富,让人快乐,只通过在互联网上独特地表达自己。职业空间被极大拓宽了:电竞选手,有人在 Fortnite 上赚几百万;做视频、
37:06uploading them youtube broadcasters bloggers you know a podcasters Joe Rogan I read true or false I don't know but I read that he's going to make about a hundred million dollars a year on his podcast and he's had two billion上传到 YouTube 的人;主播、博主、播客主。Joe Rogan——我不知道是真是假——但我读到说他靠播客一年能赚一亿美元左右,他的节目有两亿
37:17downloads even PewDiePie is a hilarious tweet that every tweeted the other day PewDiePie is the number one trusted name in news this is a kid I think in Sweden and he's got three times the distribution of the top cable news次下载。连 PewDiePie 也是——前几天有条很好笑的推文说:“PewDiePie 是新闻界最受信任的第一名。” 这是瑞典的一个小伙子,他的分发量是顶级有线新闻
37:29networks just on his news channel it's not even on his entertainment channel the internet enables any niche interest as long as you're the best at it to scale out and the great news is because every human is different everyone is网络的三倍,而且还只是在他的新闻频道上,不是他的娱乐频道。互联网让任何小众兴趣——只要你是其中最好的——都能规模化扩展。好消息是,因为每个人都不同,
37:43the best at something you being themselves another tweet I had that is worth weaving in but didn't go into this tweet storm was a very simple one I liked things from making them down because they're easy to remember it easy每个人都在某件事上是最好的:就是做自己。我另一条值得插进来、但没放进这条推文串的推文很简单,我喜欢把东西写下来,因为容易记住,也容易
37:54to hug on to but that one was escape competition through authenticity so when you're competing with people it's because you're copying them it's because you're trying to do the same thing but every human is different don't copy I know where抓住。那条是:“用真实来逃离竞争。” 当你和别人竞争时,是因为你在复制他们,是因为你在试图做同样的事。但每个人都是不同的,不要复制。我知道我们是
38:08magnetic creatures and rené girard has a whole new message theory but it's much easier than that don't imitate don't copy just do your own thing no one can compete with you on being you it's that simple and so the more模仿性动物,René Girard 有整套模仿欲望理论,但其实比那简单得多:不要模仿,不要复制,只做你自己的事。在“做你自己”这件事上,没人能跟你竞争。就这么简单。所以你越是
38:19authentic you are to who you are and what you love to do the less competition you're gonna have so you can escape competition through authenticity when you realize that no one can compete with you on being you and normally that忠实于你是谁、你热爱做什么,你面临的竞争就越少。所以你可以用真实来逃离竞争——当你意识到在“做你自己”这件事上没人能跟你竞争。通常这
38:31would have been useless advice pre internet post Internet you can turn that into a career talk a little bit about what industries you should think about working in what kind of job you should have and who you might want to在互联网之前是无用的建议,但互联网之后,你可以把它变成职业。聊聊你该考虑进入哪些行业、该做什么样的工作、以及你可能想和谁
38:43work with so you said one should pick an industry where you can play long-term games with long-term people why yeah this is an insight into what makes Silicon Valley work and what makes high trust societies work essentially all the benefits一起工作。所以你说,应该选择一个能和长期主义的人玩长期游戏的行业。为什么?对,这是理解硅谷为什么奏效、以及高信任社会为什么奏效的一个洞见。本质上,生活中所有的好处
39:00in life come from compound interests whether it's in relationships or making money or in learning so compound interest is a marvelous force where it's like you know you start out with one X what you have and then if you increased都来自复利——无论是关系、赚钱还是学习。所以复利是一种神奇的力量:你从手里的一倍开始,如果每年增长
39:1220 percent a year for 30 years it's not that you got 30 years x 20 percent added on it was compounding so it just grew grew and grew until you suddenly got a massive amount of whatever it is whether it's20%,持续 30 年,那不是 30 年乘以 20% 相加,而是复利,于是一路增长、增长、增长,直到你突然拥有巨大的量——不管是
39:23goodwill or love or relationships or money so I think compound interest is a very important force you have to go to play a long-term game and long-term games are good matches for compound interest they're also good for trust if you善意、爱、关系还是金钱。所以我认为复利是非常重要的力量,你必须去玩长期游戏,而长期游戏与复利很匹配。长期游戏也有利于信任。如果
39:34look at prisoner's dilemma type games the solution to prisoner's dilemma is tit for tat which is I'm just gonna do to you what you did last time to me with some forgiveness in case there was a mistake made but that你看囚徒困境这类博弈,囚徒困境的解是“以牙还牙”,也就是我下次对你做你上次对我做的事,同时带一点宽恕,以防是误会。但那
39:45only works in an iterated prisoner's dilemma in other words if we play the game multiple times so if you're in a situation like for example you're in Silicon Valley where people are doing business with each other and they know each只在重复囚徒困境中有效。换句话说,如果我们多次玩这个游戏。所以如果你处在这样的情境里,比如你在硅谷,人们彼此做生意,他们认识
39:55other they trust each other then they do right by each other because they know this person will be around for the next game now of course that doesn't always work because you can make so much money in one move in彼此、信任彼此,那他们就会公平对待彼此,因为他们知道这个人下一局还在。当然这不总是奏效,因为在硅谷你一笔交易就能赚太多钱,
40:05Silicon Valley sometimes you betray each other because they're just like I'm gonna get rich enough of office that I don't care so there can be exceptions to all these circumstances but essentially if you want to be successful you have to有时你们会背叛彼此,因为他们觉得“我赚够了、可以退休了,我不在乎”。所以所有情况都有例外。但本质上,如果你想成功,你必须
40:15work with other people and you have to figure out who can you trust and who can you trust over a long long period of time that you can just keep playing the game with them so that compound interest in high和别人一起工作,你必须弄清楚谁能信任、谁能在很长很长的时间里值得信任,让你可以一直和他们玩这个游戏。这样在高
40:26trust will make it easy to play the game and will let you collect the major rewards which are usually at the end of the cycle so for example Warren Buffett has done really well as an investor in the US stock信任中,复利会让游戏变得容易,也会让你收获主要回报——回报通常在周期末端。比如 Warren Buffett 作为美国股市的投资人做得非常好,
40:36market but the biggest reason he could do that was because the US stock market has been stable and around and didn't get for example seized by the government during a bad administration or the u.s. didn't plunge in some war the但他能做到这一点的最大原因,是美国股市一直稳定存在,没有在某届糟糕政府期间被政府没收,美国也没有陷入某场战争,
40:49underlying platform didn't get destroyed so in his case he was playing a long-term game and the trust came from the US stock market stability in Silicon Valley the trust comes from the network of people in the small geographic area that底层平台没有被摧毁。所以在他的情况下,他玩的是长期游戏,信任来自美国股市的稳定。在硅谷,信任来自这个小地理区域里的人群网络,
41:01you figure out over time who you can work with who you can't if you keep switching locations you keep switching groups let's say you started out in the woodworking industry and you build up a network there and you're working hard你随着时间弄清楚谁能合作、谁不能。如果你不断换地方、不断换圈子——假设你从木工行业起步,在那里建立了网络,你努力工作,
41:13you're trying to build a product in woodworking industry and then suddenly another industry comes along that's adjacent but different but you don't really know anybody in it and you want to dive in and make money there if you keep hopping想在木工行业做出一个产品,然后突然出现一个相邻但不同的行业,你在里面其实谁都不认识,你想跳进去赚钱。如果你不断在行业间跳来跳去——
41:22from industry you know actually I need to open a line of electric car stations for electric car refueling that might make sense it might be the best opportunity but every time you reset every time you wander out of where you其实比如我需要开一排电动汽车充电站,那可能说得通,可能是最好的机会——但每次你重置、每次你走出你建立网络的地方,
41:34built your network you're gonna be starting from scratch you're not gonna know who to trust they're not gonna trust you they're also industries in which people are transient by definition they're always coming in and going out politics is an example你都要从零开始,你不知道该信任谁,他们也不会信任你。还有些行业的人天生是流动的,总是有人进有人出。政治就是一个
41:46of that right in politics new people are being elected you see in politics that when you have a lot of old-timers like the Senate people have been around for a long time and they've been career politicians yeah they love them例子。在政治里,新人不断被选上来。你会看到,当有很多老资格的人,比如参议院里待了很久的职业政客——是的,人们喜欢他们,
41:57downside the career politicians that corruption but an upside is they actually get deals done with each other because they know the other person is gonna be in the same position ten years from now and they have to keep dealing with缺点是职业政客会腐败;但优点是,他们真的能彼此达成交易,因为他们知道对方十年后还在同一个位置,还得继续打交道,
42:07them so they might as well learn how to cooperate where every time you get like a new incoming freshman class in the House of Representatives which turns over every two years the big wave election nothing gets done because a lot所以他们不如学会合作。而每次来一批新的众议院新人——每两年换一次,大浪潮选举——什么都做不成,因为太多
42:17of fighting because I just got here I don't know you I don't know if you're gonna be around why should I work with you rather than just try and do whatever I think is right so it's important to pick an争斗,因为“我刚来,我不认识你,我不知道你还会不会在,我为什么要跟你合作,而不是直接做我认为对的事”。所以重要的是选择一个
42:26industry where you can play long-term games and with long-term people so those people have to signal that they're going to be around for a long time that they're ethical and their ethics are visible to their action in a long-term game能玩长期游戏、和长期的人一起玩的行业。那些人必须发出信号:他们会长期在场,他们有道德,而他们的道德在长期游戏的行为中可见。
42:40it seems that everybody is making each other rich and in a short-term game it seems like everybody is making themselves rich I think that is a brilliant formulation yeah in a long-term game it's positive some we're all baking acquired together在长期游戏里,看起来每个人都在让别人变富;在短期游戏里,看起来每个人都在让自己变富。我觉得这个表述非常精彩。是的,在长期游戏里是正和的,我们一起把饼做大,
42:56we're trying to make it as big as possible in a short-term game we're cutting up the pie now this is not to excuse the Socialists right the Socialists those people who are not involved in baking the pie who show up我们努力把它做得尽可能大;在短期游戏里,我们是在分饼。这不是在为社会主义者开脱——那些社会主义者不参与烤饼,却在最后
43:06at the end and say I want a slice or I want the whole pie they show up with the guns but I think a good leader doesn't take credit a good leader tries to inspire people's that the team get the出现,说“我要一块”或者“我要整张饼”,他们带着枪来。但我认为好的领导者不居功,好的领导者试图激励人们,让团队把
43:14job done and then things get divided up according to fairness and who contributed how much or as close to it as possible and took a risk as opposed to just whoever has the longest night the sharpest knives at the end活干完,然后按公平、按谁贡献了多少来分配,尽可能接近公平,按谁承担了风险来分,而不是按最后谁的刀最长、最锋利来分。
43:26so these next two tweets are play iterated games all returns in life whether in wealth relationships or knowledge come from compound interest yeah when you have been doing business with somebody you've been friends with somebody for 10 years 20 years所以接下来这两条推文是:玩重复博弈。人生中所有的回报——无论财富、关系还是知识——都来自复利。是的,当你和某人做生意、和某人做朋友十年、二十年、
43:4130 years it just gets better and better because you trust them so easy if the friction goes down you can do bigger and bigger things together for example you know the simplest one is getting married to someone having kids and三十年,一切只会越来越好,因为你信任他们,摩擦降低了,你们可以一起做越来越大的事。比如最简单的例子:和某人结婚、生孩子、
43:51raising children like that's compound interest right investing in those relationships those relations and would be invaluable compared to more casual relationships it's true in health and fitness you know the fitter you are the easier it is to stay fit where's养育孩子,那就是复利。投资那些关系,那些关系会变得无比宝贵,远超随意的关系。健康与健身也是如此:你越健康,保持健康就越容易;而
44:03the more you'd deteriorate your body the harder it is to come back and claw your way back to a baseline and requires heroic acts regarding compound interest I think I saw you retweet something awhile back maybe it was from Edie你越是糟蹋身体,恢复就越难,想爬回基线就要付出英雄般的努力。关于复利,我记得不久前看到你转过一条推文,可能是 Ed Latimore 的,
44:16Lattimore it went something along the lines of get some traction get purchase and don't lose it so the idea was to gain some initial traction and never fall back just keep ratcheting up and up I don't remember exactly but I大意是:获得一些牵引力、站稳脚跟,然后别失去它。意思是先获得最初的牵引力,然后永不后退,只是一路往上棘轮式攀升。我不记得原文了,但我
44:32think that was right yeah I was a kid traction don't let go it was a good one yeah in terms of pick people to work with that I have high intelligence high energy and high integrity I find that's the three觉得那是对的。是的,我小时候——“获得牵引力,别松手”,那是句好话。说到选择合作的人:高智力、高能量、高诚信,我发现这是三条
44:42part checklist that you cannot compromise on you need someone who's smart or they're heading in the wrong direction and you're not gonna end up in the right place you need someone high energy because the world is full of smart lazy不能妥协的清单。你需要聪明的人,否则他们会朝错误方向走,你最终不会到达正确的地方;你需要高能量的人,因为世界上到处都是聪明但懒惰的
44:53people we all know people in our lives are really smart but you know can't get out of bed or lift a finger and we also know people have a very high energy but not that smart so they work hard but人。我们都认识生活中非常聪明、但你知道就是起不了床、动不了一根手指的人;我们也认识能量很高但不太聪明的人,他们很努力,但
45:01then running in the wrong direction and smart it's not a pejorative it's not meant to be like someone smart someone else is stupid but it's more than everyone's smart at different things so depending on what you want to do well方向是错的。而“聪明”不是贬义词,不是说某个人聪明、别人就蠢,而是说每个人在不同的事上聪明。所以取决于你想做好什么,
45:11you have to find someone who's smart at that thing and then energy a lot of times people are unmotivated for a specific thing but they're not motivated for other things for example someone might be really unmotivated to go to a你必须找到在那件事上聪明的人。然后是能量:很多时候人们对某件特定的事毫无动力,但对别的事很有动力。比如某人可能非常没动力去上
45:23job and sit in an office but they might be really motivated to go paint right well in that case they should be a painter they should be putting art up on the internet trying to figure out how to build a一份班、坐在办公室里,但他可能非常有动力去画画。那在这种情况下他就该做个画家,他该把艺术放到互联网上,想办法靠这个建立
45:31career out of that rather than wearing a collar around their neck and going to a dreary job and then high integrity is the most important because otherwise it got the other two what you have is you have a smart and事业,而不是脖子上套着项圈去做一份沉闷的工作。而高诚信是最重要的,因为否则——即使有了前两个——你得到的是一个聪明又
45:41hardworking crook who's eventually gonna cheat you so you have to figure out if the person is high integrity and as we talked about the way you do that is through signals and signals is what they do not what they say勤奋的骗子,最终会骗你。所以你必须判断这个人是否高诚信。正如我们谈过的,判断的方式是看信号,而信号是他们做了什么,不是他们说了什么,
45:51it's all the nonverbal stuff that people do when they think nobody's looking with respect to the energy there was this interesting thing from Sam Altman a while back where he was talking about delegation and even saying one of the important是那些人们以为没人看着时的非语言行为。说到能量,Sam Altman 不久前有段很有意思的话,他谈授权,甚至说授权最重要的事情之一
46:05things for delegation is delegate to people who are actually good at the thing that you want to do it's the most obvious thing but it seems like you want to partner with people who are naturally going to do the things是把事授权给真正擅长你想做的那件事的人。这是最显而易见的道理,但你似乎应该和那些自然而然地会去做
46:18that you want them to do yeah I almost won't start a company or hire a person or work with somebody if I just don't think they're into what I wanted to do when I was younger I used to try and你希望他们做的事的人合作。是的,如果我不觉得某个人真的热衷于我想做的事,我几乎不会跟他开公司、雇他或者合作。我年轻时曾试图
46:29talk people into things I was in this idea you can sell someone into doing something but you can't you can't keep them motivated you can get them inspired initially it might work if you're a king like Henry the fifth you're说服别人。我那时以为你可以把一个人“卖”进做某件事,但你不能,你无法长期维持他的动力。你可以在最初激发他,如果你是国王,像亨利五世那样
46:39trying to get them to just charge in the battle and then they'll figure it out but if you're trying to keep someone motivated for the long term but motivation has to come intrinsically you can't just create it nor can you试图让他们冲锋陷阵,然后他们自己会想办法。但如果你想让人长期保持动力,动力必须来自内在,你无法凭空制造,你也不能
46:48be the crutch for them if they don't have that intrinsic motivation so you have to make sure people actually are high-energy and want to do what you want them to do what you want to work with them reading signals is成为他们的拐杖——如果他们没有那种内在动力。所以你必须确保人们确实高能量、确实想做你希望他们做的事、确实想和你合作。读懂信号
46:57very very important signals are what people do despite what they say so it's important to pay attention to subtle signals we all know that socially if someone treats a waiter or waitress in a restaurant and we badly then it's only非常非常重要。信号是人们做了什么,而不是他们说了什么。所以要注意微妙的信号。我们都知道,在社交场合,如果一个人对餐厅的服务员态度恶劣,那只是
47:10a matter of time until they treat you badly if somebody screws over an enemy and is vindictive towards them well it's only a matter of time before they redefine you from friend to enemy and you feel their wrath so angry时间问题,他迟早也会这样对你。如果一个人对敌人下手狠、充满报复心,那也只是时间问题,他会把你从朋友重新定义为敌人,让你感受他的怒火。所以愤怒、
47:21outraged vindictive short-term thinking people are essentially that way in many interactions in their life people are oddly consistent it's one of things you learn about them so you want to find long-term people you want to find people who seem irrationally愤慨、报复心强、短期思维的人,在他们生活的许多互动中本质上都是那样。人出奇地一致,这是你会学到的一件事。所以你要找长期的人,找那些看起来不理性地
47:36ethical for example I had one friend of mine it was company I invested in and the company failed and he could have wiped out all the investors but he kept putting more and more personal money in through three different pivots讲道德的人。比如我有一个朋友,我投资了他的公司,公司失败了,他本可以让所有投资人颗粒无收,但他经过三次转型,不断追加自己的个人资金,
47:47he put personal money in until the company finally succeeded and in the process he never what got the investors and I was always grateful to him for that I said like wow that's amazing that you know you were so good他一直投个人资金,直到公司最终成功。在这个过程中,他从来没有坑过投资人,我一直很感激他。我说:哇,太厉害了,你对
47:57to your investors you didn't wipe them out and he got offended by that he said I didn't do it for you I didn't do it for my investors I did it for me it's my own self-esteem it's what I care你的投资人真好,没有把他们清零。他反而被这话冒犯了,他说:我不是为你们做的,我不是为我的投资人做的,我是为我自己做的,是为了我的自尊,是我在乎的东西,
48:08about that's how I live my life that's the kind of person you want to work with another quote that I like I would tweet on this I think I read this somewhere else which me said I'm not taking credit for这就是我生活方式。这就是你想合作的那种人。我喜欢的另一句话,我在推特上发过,我想我是在别处读到的——我不邀功,
48:16this but I modified a little bit which is that self-esteem is a reputation that you have with yourself you'll always know so good people moral people ethical people easy to work with people reliable people tend to have very high self-esteem但我做了一点修改——自尊是你和自己之间的声誉,你永远知道。所以好人、有道德的人、讲伦理的人、好合作的人、可靠的人,往往有很高的自尊,
48:31because they have very good reputation with themselves and they understand that it's not ego self esteem and ego are different things because ego can be undeserving but self esteem at least you feel like you lived up to your own internal因为他们和自己之间有很好的声誉,他们明白那不是自我。自尊和自我是不同的东西,因为自我可能是不配得的,而自尊至少让你觉得自己达到了自己内心的
48:43moral code of ethics and so it's very hard to work with people who end up being low integrity that it's hard to figure out who's high integrity and low integrity generally the more someone is saying that their moral and ethical道德准则。所以和低诚信的人共事非常难,而判断谁高诚信、谁低诚信也很难。一般来说,一个人越是说自己有道德、有伦理、
48:55and high integrity the less likely they're to be that way it's very much like status signaling if you overtly bid for star if you already talked about being high status that is a low status move if you openly talk about高诚信,他就越可能不是那样。这很像地位信号:如果你公开争夺地位,如果你已经在谈自己地位高,那是低地位的动作。如果你公开谈
49:07how honest and reliable and trustworthy you are you're probably not that honest and trustworthy that is a characteristic of conman so yeah picking an industry in which you can play long-term games with long-term people let's look at this last tweet自己有多诚实、可靠、值得信任,你大概就没那么诚实可靠。那是骗子的特征。所以是的,选择一个能和长期的人玩长期游戏的行业。我们来看看最后这条推文,
49:22you said don't partner with cynics and pessimists their beliefs are self-fulfilling yeah essentially to create things you have to be a rational optimist rational in the sense that you have to go see the world for what it really is and你说:不要和愤世嫉俗者、悲观主义者合伙,他们的信念会自我实现。是的,本质上,要创造东西,你必须是一个理性的乐观主义者。理性,是指你必须去看世界真实的样子,
49:36yet you have to be optimistic about your own capabilities and your tymberlee to get things done we all know people who are consistently pessimistic who will shoot down everything everyone in their life has like the helpful critical guy right he但同时又必须对自己能力、对自己把事情做成的能力保持乐观。我们都认识那种一贯悲观、会否决一切的人。每个人生活里都有那个“乐于助人的批评者”,
49:49thinks he's being helpful but he's actually being critical and he's a downer on everything that person will not only never do anything great in their lives they'll prevent other people around them for doing something great they think their job is他以为自己是在帮忙,但实际上是在批评,他对一切都在泼冷水。那种人不仅自己一辈子做不成任何伟大的事,还会阻止身边的人做成伟大的事。他们认为自己的工作是
50:01to shoot holes in things and it's okay to shoot holes in things as long as you come up with a solution there's also the classic like military line I will lead follow or get out of the way and these people在东西上打洞。打洞没问题,只要你能提出解决方案。还有那句经典的军事说法:“我来领导、跟随,或者让开。” 而这些人
50:12want a fourth option well they don't want to lead they don't want to follow but they don't want to get out of the way they want to tell you why the things not going to work and all the really successful想要第四个选项:他们不想领导、不想跟随,但也不想让开,他们想告诉你这件事为什么行不通。而我认识的所有真正成功
50:20people I know have a very strong action bias they just do things the easiest way to figure out if something is viable or not is by doing it at least do the first step in the second step in the third的人都有很强的行动偏向,他们直接去做。判断一件事是否可行,最容易的办法就是去做,至少做第一步、第二步、第三步,
50:31and then decide so if you want to be successful in life creating wealth or having good relationships or being fit or even being happy you need to have an action bias towards getting what you want and you have to be然后再决定。所以如果你想在人生中成功——创造财富、拥有良好的关系、保持健康,甚至只是快乐——你需要有朝着目标行动的偏向,而且你必须
50:42optimistic about it not irrationally there's nothing worse than someone who's is the foolhardy and chasing that's not work that's that's a rational optimist but you have to be rational know all the pitfalls know the downsides but still keep your chin对此乐观。不是盲目乐观——没有比一个莽撞蛮干的人更糟的了,那不是乐观,那是莽撞。你要做理性的乐观主义者,但要理性:了解所有陷阱、了解下行风险,同时仍然抬起下巴。
50:54up I mean you've got one life on this planet why not try to build something big this is the beauty of Elon Musk and why I think he inspires so many people is just when he takes on really really big我的意思是,你在这个星球上只有一次生命,为什么不试着建点大的东西?这就是 Elon Musk 的美妙之处,也是我认为他激励了那么多人的原因:
51:03audacious tasks and he provides an example for people to think big and it takes a lot of work to build even small things I don't think the corner grocery store owner is working any less hard than Elon Musk pouring any他承接真正巨大、大胆的任务,为人们提供了一个大胆思考的榜样。而即使建小东西也需要大量工作。我不认为街角杂货店老板比 Elon Musk 付出的努力更少、
51:16less sweat and toil into it maybe even more but for whatever reason you know education circumstance they didn't get the chance to think as big so the outcomes not as big so it's just better to think big obviously rationally within流的汗、受的累更少,甚至可能更多。但不管什么原因——教育、境遇——他们没机会去大胆思考,所以结果也没那么大。所以最好还是大胆思考,当然要在
51:28your means stay optimistic the cynics and the pessimists what they're really saying and fortunate but they're saying I've given up I don't think I can do anything and so the world to me just looks like a world where nobody can你能力范围内理性地思考。保持乐观。愤世嫉俗者和悲观主义者真正在说的是——很不幸——他们在说:我放弃了,我认为我做不成任何事,所以世界在我看来就是个没人能
51:41do anything and so why should you go do something because if you fail then I'm right which is great but if you succeed and you just make me look bad yeah it's probably better to be an irrational optimist than it做成任何事的世界,那你为什么还要去做?因为如果你失败了,我就对了,这很好;但如果你成功了,你就让我显得很差劲。是的,做个非理性的乐观主义者,大概比
51:53is to be a rational cynic yeah there's a completely rational frame on why you should be an optimist historically if you go back 2,000 years 5,000 there's 10,000 years to people are wandering through a jungle they hear a tiger one's做个理性的愤世嫉俗者更好。是的,有一个完全理性的框架解释你为什么该乐观:历史上,回到两千年、五千年、一万年前,两个人在丛林里走,听到老虎,一个
52:06an optimist and says oh it's not headed our way the other one says I'm a pessimist I'm out of here and the pessimist runs and survives and the optimist gets eaten so we descended from pessimists we're genetically hardwired to be是乐观主义者,说“它没往我们这边来”;另一个说“我是悲观主义者,我先走了”。悲观主义者跑了,活下来;乐观主义者被吃了。所以我们是悲观主义者的后代,我们在基因上天生就是
52:18pessimists but modern society is far far safer there are no Tigers wandering down the street it's very unlikely that you will end up in total ruin although you should avoid total ruin much more likely if the upside is unlimited and悲观主义者。但现代社会安全得多,街上没有老虎游荡,你最终彻底毁灭的可能性非常低——尽管你仍应避免彻底毁灭。而如果上行无限、
52:31the downside is limited so adapting for modern society means overriding your pessimism and taking slightly irrationally optimistic bets because the upside is unlimited if you start the next SpaceX or Tesla or uber you can make billions of dollars of value下行有限,那么更可能的情况是……所以适应现代社会意味着要覆盖你的悲观本能,去下略微非理性乐观的赌注,因为上行是无限的。如果你创立下一个 SpaceX、Tesla 或 Uber,你可以为社会、为自己创造数十亿美元的价值,
52:47for society and for yourself and change the world and if you fail that's the big deal you lost a few million dollars and invest your money and they've got plenty more and that's the bet they take the chances that you改变世界。如果你失败了,那有什么大不了的?你损失了投资人几百万美元,他们还有很多钱,他们承担的就是这种赌注,赌你
52:56will succeed it made sense to be pessimistic in the past it makes sense to be optimistic today especially if you're educated and living in a first world country even a third world country actually think the economic opportunity in third world会成功。在过去做悲观主义者是合理的,今天做乐观主义者是合理的,尤其如果你受过教育、生活在第一世界国家。其实第三世界国家的经济机会
53:08countries are much larger the one thing you have to avoid is the risk of ruin ruin means to stay out of so don't do anything that's illegal it's never worth it to wear an orange jumpsuit and stay out of total大得多。你必须避免的一件事是毁灭风险。毁灭意味着出局,所以不要做任何违法的事——穿橙色囚服永远不值得;也要避免彻底的
53:19catastrophic loss that could mean that you stay out of things that could be physically dangerous hurt your body you have to watch your health and stay out of things that can cause you to lose all Capital all of your savings灾难性损失,这意味着你要避开可能造成身体危险、伤害身体的事,你必须注意健康;也要避开可能让你失去全部资本、全部积蓄的事,
53:30it'll gamble everything at one go but you take rationally optimistic bets with big upside I think there's people that will try and build up your ideas and build on your ideas no matter how far-fetched they might seem and then there不要一次赌上一切。但你要下理性乐观、上行为巨大的赌注。我认为有些人会试图建立你的想法、在你的想法上添砖加瓦,无论它们看起来多离谱;而
53:43are people who will list out all the obvious exceptions no matter how obvious they are and fortunately in the startup world I don't even really get exposed to the people that are giving you the obvious exceptions and all the reasons另一些人会把所有显而易见的例外都列出来,无论它们多显而易见。幸运的是,在创业世界里,我几乎接触不到那些给你列出显而易见例外、列出所有
53:57it's not going to work I'd barely get exposed to that anymore absolute way today's forum Scott Adams got so annoyed by this dude he came up with the phrase an acronym which is but of course there are obvious exceptions BOC为什么行不通的理由的人。我几乎已经接触不到了。今天那个论坛上,Scott Adams 被这类人烦得不行,于是他想出了一个短语和缩写:BOC,
54:09ta OE and he used to like pin that acronym at the end of his articles for a while but twitterings just like overrun with nit pickers and which exactly as you're pointing out Silicon Valley has learned that the upside is也就是“但是当然,总有显而易见的例外”,他曾经有段时间把这缩写钉在文章末尾。但推特上到处都是挑刺的人,而正如你指出的,硅谷已经学到:上行
54:21so great that you never look down on the slavi kid who's wearing a hoodie and has like coffee on his shoes and just look like a slob because you don't know if he's gonna be the next Mark Zuckerberg or the如此之大,以至于你绝不会看不起那个穿连帽衫、鞋上有咖啡渍、看起来邋里邋遢的孩子,因为你不知道他会不会成为下一个 Mark Zuckerberg 或
54:31next Reid Hoffman so you gotta treat everybody with respect you gotta look up to every possibility and opportunity because the upside is so unlimited the downside is so limited in the modern world especially with financial assets and instruments you want下一个 Reid Hoffman。所以你必须尊重每个人,必须看重每一种可能和机会,因为上行是无限的,下行是有限的。在现代世界,尤其是有了金融资产和工具,
54:45to talk a little bit about the skills that you need in particular specific knowledge accountability leverage and judgment so the first tweet in this area is arm yourself with specific knowledge accountability and leverage and I'll throw in judgment as well你想聊聊你需要的技能,特别是特定知识、问责、杠杆和判断力。所以这个领域的第一条推文是:用特定知识、问责和杠杆武装自己。我还要加上判断力,
55:05I don't think you covered that in that particular tweet if you want to make money you have to get paid at scale and why you that's accountability at scale that's leverage and just you getting paid as opposed to somebody else我想你在那条推文里没提到它。如果你想赚钱,你必须能规模化地拿到报酬——为什么是你?那是规模化问责;那是杠杆;而拿到报酬的是你而不是别人,
55:20getting paid that's specific knowledge so specific knowledge is probably the hardest thing to get across in this whole tweet storm and it's probably the thing that people get the most confused about the thing is that we have this idea that那是特定知识。所以特定知识大概是整条推文串里最难传达的东西,也大概是人们最容易搞混的东西。问题在于我们有这样一种观念:
55:34everything can be taught everything can be taught in school and it's not true that everything can be taught in fact the most interesting things cannot be taught thing can be learned and very often that learning either comes from some innate一切都可以被教,一切都可以在学校里教。但并非一切都能被教。事实上,最有趣的东西是无法教的。东西可以被学,而这种学习往往要么来自你 DNA 里某种天生的
55:47characteristics in your DNA or it could be through your childhood where you learn soft skills which are very very hard to teach later on in life or it's something that is brand-new so nobody else knows how to do it either特质,要么来自你的童年——你学到了软技能,而这些软技能在人生后期极难教;要么它是全新的东西,所以别人也都不知道怎么做;
56:00or it's true on-the-job training because your pattern matching into highly complex environments building judgment in a specific domain classically example is investing but it could be in anything it could be in judgment in running a fleet of trucks it could要么它是真正的在职训练,因为你在高度复杂的环境里做模式匹配,在某个特定领域里建立判断力。经典例子是投资,但也可以是任何领域:可以是管理一支卡车车队的判断,可以
56:14be a judgement in weather forecasting so specific knowledge is the knowledge that you care about especially if you're later in life let's say your post 20 21 22 you almost don't get to choose which specific knowledge you have rather you是天气预报的判断。所以特定知识是你在乎的知识,尤其如果你年纪稍长——比如你 20、21、22 岁以后,你几乎不能选择自己拥有哪种特定知识,而是
56:28get to look at what you have already built by that point in time and then you can build on top of it the first thing to notice about specific knowledge is that you can't be trained for it if you can你去看自己到那时已经建成了什么,然后可以在上面继续搭建。关于特定知识,第一件要注意的事是:你无法通过培训获得它。如果它可以
56:38be trained for it if you can go to a class and learn specific knowledge then somebody else can be trained for it - and then we can mass produce and mass train people heck we even program computers to do it通过培训获得——如果去上课就能学到特定知识——那么别人也能被培训出来,然后我们就可以大规模生产、大规模培训人,甚至我们可以给计算机编程来做这件事,
56:48and eventually we can program robots to walk around doing it so if that's the case then you're extremely replaceable and all we have to pay you is the minimum wage that we have to pay you to get you to do最终我们能让机器人四处走来做这件事。所以如果是那样,你就极其可被替换,我们付给你的只是让你干活的最低工资,
56:58it when there are lots of other takers who can be trained to do it so really your returns just devolve into your cost of training plus the return on investment on that training so you really want to pick up specific因为还有很多其他可被培训的索取者。所以你的回报最终就退化为你的培训成本,加上那笔培训的投资回报。所以你真正要获取的是特定
57:10knowledge you need your schooling you need your training to be able to capitalize on the best specific knowledge but the part of it that Juliet paid for is the specific knowledge for example someone who goes and gets a degree in知识。你需要学校教育、需要训练,才能利用最好的特定知识,但其中真正被付钱的部分是特定知识。比如一个人去拿了个
57:22psychology and then becomes a salesperson well if they were already a formidable salesperson I had great salesmanship to begin with then the psychology degree is leverage it arms them and they do much better at sales but if they were always心理学学位,然后去做销售。如果他本来就是个厉害的销售,本来就有很强的销售能力,那心理学学位就是杠杆,武装了他,让他在销售上做得更好。但如果他一直是
57:34an introvert never very good at sales and they're trying to use psychology to learn sales they're just not gonna get that great at so civic knowledge is found much more by pursuing your innate talents your genuine curiosity and your passion个内向的人、销售一直不好,却想用心理学来学销售,他就是不会做得多好。所以特定知识更多是通过追求你天生的才能、真正的好奇心和热情来发现的,
57:48it's not by going to school for whatever is the hottest job it's not for going into whatever field investors the hottest very often specific knowledge is at the edge of knowledge it's also stuff that's just being figured out or is而不是去学校学当下最热门的职业,也不是进入当下最热门的领域。特定知识常常处在知识的前沿,也常常是刚刚被弄明白的东西,或者
58:02really hard to figure out so if you're not 100% into it somebody else who is 100% into it will outperform you and they won't just outperform you by a little bit they'll outperform you by a lot because now we're operating是极难弄明白的东西。所以如果你不是百分之百投入,另一个百分之百投入的人就会超过你,而且不会只超过你一点点,而是会超过你很多,因为现在我们处在
58:14the domain of ideas compound interest really applies and leverage really applies so if you're operating with a thousand times leverage and somebody is right 80 percent of the time and somebody is else right 90 percent of time the person who's想法的领域,复利真正起作用,杠杆真正起作用。所以如果你带着一千倍的杠杆运作,一个人正确率 80%,另一个人正确率 90%,那个
58:27right 90 percent of time will literally get paid hundreds of times more by the market because of the leverage and because of the compounding factors in being correct so you really want to make sure you're good at it so they're正确率 90% 的人,市场付给他的钱会多出几百倍,因为杠杆,因为正确的复利效应。所以你必须确保自己真的擅长它。所以
58:37genuine curiosity is very important so very often it's not something you sit down and you reason about it's more found by observation you almost have to look back on your own life and see what you're actually good at for example真正的好奇心非常重要。很多时候它不是坐下来推理出来的,更多是通过观察发现的。你几乎要回看自己的人生,看看自己实际擅长什么。比如
58:49I wanted to be a scientist and that is where a lot of my moral hierarchy comes from I view scientists at the top of the production chain for Humanity and the group of scientists who have made real breakthroughs and contributions我想成为科学家,我的很多道德等级都来自那里。我把科学家看作人类生产链的顶端,那些做出真正突破和贡献的科学家群体
59:03have probably added more to human society and I think than any single other class of human beings not to take away anything from art or politics or engineering or business but without the science you know we'd still be scrabbling the大概比任何其他单一人类群体为人类社会增加的东西都多。这不是要贬低艺术、政治、工程或商业,但如果没有科学,我们今天大概还在扒拉
59:16dirt fighting with sticks and trying to start fires my whole value system was built around scientists and I wanted to be a great scientist but when I actually look back at what I was uniquely good at and what I ended泥土、拿棍子打架、试着生火。我整个价值体系都是围绕科学家建立的,我想成为一个伟大的科学家。但当我真正回看自己独特擅长什么、以及最终
59:27up spending my time doing it was more around making money tinkering with technology and selling people on things explaining things talking to people so I have some sales skills which is a form of specific knowledge that I have I have把时间花在什么上,那更多是关于赚钱、摆弄技术、向人推销东西、解释事情、和人交谈。所以我有一些销售技能,那是我拥有的一种特定知识;我
59:41some analytical skills around how to make money and I having this ability to absorb data obsess about it and break it down and that is a specific skill that I have I also just love tinkering with technology and all of有一些关于如何赚钱的分析技能,我有吸收数据、对它着迷、拆解它的能力,那是我拥有的一种特定技能。我也就是喜欢摆弄技术,所有这些
59:53this stuff feels like play to me but it looks like work to others so there are other people to whom these things would be hard they say like well how do I get good at being pithy and selling ideas well对我来说都像玩,但对别人看起来像工作。所以对另一些人来说,这些事会很难,他们会说:我怎么才能变得善于精炼地表达、推销想法?
1:00:04if you're not already good at it or they're not really into it maybe it's not your thing focus on the thing that you are really into this is ironic but the first person that actually point out my real specific knowledge如果你本来就不擅长,或者你不是真的喜欢,也许那不是你的菜。专注于你真正喜欢的东西。说来讽刺,第一个真正指出我特定知识的人,
1:00:15was my mother and she did it as an aside talking from the kitchen and she said it when I was like 15 or 16 years old I was telling a friend of mine that I wanted to be an astrophysicist and是我母亲。她是在厨房里随口说的,那时我大概 15、16 岁,我跟一个朋友说我想成为天体物理学家,
1:00:25she said no you're gonna go into business and I was like what my mom's telling me I'm gonna be in business I'm gonna be an astrophysicist mom doesn't know what she's talking about but mom knew exactly what she was talking她说:不,你会去做生意。我当时想:什么?我妈告诉我我会做生意?我要做天体物理学家,我妈根本不知道自己在说什么。但我妈完全知道自己在说
1:00:34about she had already observed that every time we walked down the street I would critique the local pizza parlor on why they were selling their slices a certain way with certain toppings and why the process of ordering was this way什么。她已经观察到,每次我们走在街上,我都会点评当地的披萨店:为什么他们这样卖披萨切片、放这些配料,为什么点单流程是这样,
1:00:44when it should have been that way so she knew that I was just had more of a business curious mind but then my obsession with science combined to create technology and technology businesses where I found myself so very often your而本应该是那样。所以她知道我更多是有一颗商业好奇的头脑。但后来我对科学的痴迷结合起来,创造了技术和科技企业,我就在那里找到了自己。所以很多时候你的
1:00:56specific knowledge is observed and often observed by other people who know you well and reveal in situations rather than something that you come up with to the extent that specific knowledge is taught it's on the job it's through apprenticeships and特定知识是被观察到的,而且常常是被熟悉你的人观察到的,在情境中显露出来,而不是你自己想出来的。就特定知识被教授的部分而言,那是在工作中、通过学徒制进行的,
1:01:09that's why the best businesses the best careers are the apprenticeship careers because those are things that society still has not figured out how to train and automate yet the classic line here is that Warren Buffett went to Benjamin Graham when这就是为什么最好的企业、最好的职业是学徒制职业,因为那些是社会还没弄明白怎么培训和自动化的东西。这里有一句经典的话:Warren Buffett 毕业后去找 Benjamin Graham,
1:01:20he got out of school and Benjamin Graham was the author the intelligent investor is sort of modernized or created value investing as a discipline and Warren Buffett went to Benjamin Graham and offered to work for him for free and GrahamBenjamin Graham 是《聪明的投资者》的作者,某种程度上现代化、或者说开创了价值投资这门学科。Warren Buffett 去找 Benjamin Graham,提出免费为他工作,Graham
1:01:31said actually you're overpriced free is overpriced and Graham was absolutely right that when it comes to a very valuable apprenticeship like the type that Graham was going to give Buffett Buffett should have been paying him a lot of money and说:其实你太贵了,免费都太贵了。Graham 完全正确:当涉及像 Graham 要给 Buffett 的那种极有价值的学徒机会时,Buffett 本应付给他很多钱。
1:01:45that right there tells you that those are skills worth knowing specific knowledge also tends to be technical and creative so on the bleeding edge of technology on the bleeding edge of art on the bleeding edge of communication even today for这一点本身就告诉你,那些是值得掌握的技能。特定知识也往往既有技术性又有创造性,所以处在技术的最前沿、艺术的最前沿、传播的最前沿。即使在今天,
1:01:58example there are probably meme lords out there on the internet who can create incredible memes that will spread the idea to millions of people or are very persuasive like for example Scott Adams is a good example this he's essentially becoming比如互联网上大概有一些“梗王”,能创造出极其精彩的梗,把想法传播给几百万的人;或者非常有说服力。比如 Scott Adams 就是个好例子,他本质上正在成为
1:02:12one of the most credible people in the world by making accurate predictions through persuasive arguments and videos and that is specific knowledge that he has built up over the because he got obsessed with hypnosis when he was young he learned世界上最有可信度的人之一,靠的是通过有说服力的论证和视频做出准确预测。那是他多年来建立起来的特定知识,因为他年轻时痴迷催眠,他学了
1:02:25how to communicate through cartooning he embraced periscope early so he's been practicing lots of conversation he's read all the books on the topic he's employed it in his everyday life if you look at his girlfriend she's like this beautiful young如何通过漫画来沟通,他很早拥抱了 Periscope,所以他练习了大量对话,他读遍了这个话题的所有书,他在日常生活中运用它。你看看他的女朋友,她就像个漂亮的年轻
1:02:36Instagram model that is an example of someone who has built up a specific knowledge over the course of his career it's highly creative it has elements of being technical in it and it's something that is never gonna be automated noInstagram 模特——这就是一个人在其职业生涯中建立起特定知识的例子。它高度有创造性,带有技术成分,而且永远不会被自动化,没
1:02:48one's gonna take that away from him because he's also accountable under one brand as Scott Adams and he's operating with a leverage of media with periscope and drawing Dilbert cartoons and writing books he has massive leverage on top of that有人能从他身上拿走,因为他同时以 Scott Adams 这个品牌承担问责,并且用媒体的杠杆运作:Periscope、画 Dilbert 漫画、写书。他在那个品牌之上拥有巨大的杠杆,
1:03:00brand and he can build wealth out of it if he wanted to build additional wealth beyond what he already has should we be calling it unique knowledge or the specific knowledge somehow make more sense for it you know I came可以从中创造财富——如果他想要在已有的之外再创造更多财富的话。我们是不是该叫它“独特知识”,“特定知识”是否更说得通?你知道,
1:03:13up with his framework when I was really young and we're talking decades and decades it's not probably over 30 years old and so at the time too specific knowledge stuck with me so that is how I think about it the我是在很年轻的时候想出这个框架的,那是几十年前的事了,大概有三十多年。当时“特定知识”这个词让我记住了,所以我就这么想它。
1:03:23reason I didn't try and change it is because every other term that I found for it was overloaded in a different way at least specific knowledge isn't that used I can rebrand it the probably unique knowledge is yeah maybe it's我没试着改掉它的原因,是我为它找到的每个其他词都在另一种意义上被过度使用了,至少“特定知识”没那么常用。我可以给它重新命名,大概“独特知识”……也许它确实
1:03:37unique but if I learn it from somebody else is no longer unique then we both know it so it's not so much that it is unique it's that it is highly specific the situation it's specific to the individual it's specific独特,但如果我从别人那里学到它,它就不再独特了,因为我们都知道了。所以与其说它独特,不如说它高度具体:它具体对应情境,具体对应个人,它具体
1:03:48to the problem and it can only be built as part of a larger obsession interest and time spent in that domain they can't just be read straight out of a single book nor can be taught in a single course nor对应问题,而且它只能作为更大的痴迷、兴趣和在该领域投入时间的一部分被建立起来。它不能直接从一本书里读出来,也不能在一门课里被教,
1:04:03can it be programmed into a single algorithm speaking of Scott Adams he's got a blog post on how to build your career by getting in say the top 25 percentile at three or more things and by doing that you become也不能被编程进单一算法。说到 Scott Adams,他有一篇博客文章讲如何建立职业生涯:在三个或更多领域进入前 25%,这样你就成为
1:04:21the only person in the world who can do those three things in the 25th percentile so instead of trying to be the best at one thing you just try to be very very good at three or more things is that世界上唯一一个能在这三件事上都处于前 25% 的人。所以与其试图在一件事上做到最好,不如试着在三件或更多事情上做到非常非常好。这
1:04:32a way of building specific knowledge you think the best way is just to follow your own obsession and somewhere in the back of your mind you can realize that hey actually this obsession like I'll keep an eye out for the是建立特定知识的一种方式吗?你认为最好的方式就是跟随你自己的痴迷,同时在心里某个角落意识到:其实这个痴迷——我会留意
1:04:44commercial aspects of it but I think if you go around trying to build it a little too deliberately if you become too goal-oriented on the money then you won't pick the right thing you won't actually pick the thing that you它的商业层面。但我认为,如果你到处试图过于刻意地建立它,如果你过于以钱为目标导向,你就不会选到对的东西,你不会真正选到那件你
1:04:55love to do so you won't go deep enough into it scott adams is observation is a good one it's predicated on statistics let's say there's 10,000 areas that are valuable to the human race today in terms of knowledge to have热爱去做的事,所以你不会深入得足够。Scott Adams 的观察很好,它建立在统计之上。假设今天对人类有价值的知识领域有一万个,
1:05:06and the number one in those 10,000 slots is taken right someone else is likely to be the number one each of those 10,000 unless you happen to be one of the 10,000 most obsessed people in the world at a given而这一万个位置上的第一名都已被占据——除非你恰好是全世界在某件事上最痴迷的一万人之一,否则每个领域的第一名很可能已经是别人了。
1:05:18thing but when you start going the of combining well number three thousand seven or twenty eight with top-notch sales skills and really good writing skills and so on with whom understands accounting and finance really well when the need for that但当你开始组合——比如把第 3000、第 7000 或第 28000 名,配上顶尖的销售技能、很好的写作技能,再加上精通会计和金融——当那个
1:05:31intersection arrives you've expanded now from ten thousand through comminute oryx to millions or tens of millions so it just becomes much less competitive also there's diminishing returns so it's much easier to be top 75 percentile at three or four things交叉点的需求出现时,你就从一万个扩展到了数百万、数千万个组合,竞争就小得多。而且存在边际递减,所以在三四个领域做到前 25% 要容易得多,
1:05:45that is to be literally the number one at something I think it's a very pragmatic approach but I think it's important that one not start assembling things to deliberately because you do want to pick things where you are a everyone而不是真正在某件事上做到第一。我认为这是个非常务实的做法,但我认为重要的是不要刻意去拼装这些东西,因为你确实要选那些你
1:06:00is a natural at something we're all familiar with that phrase unnatural or this person is that a natural at meeting men or where this person is a natural socialite this person is a natural programmer this person is a natural reader有天赋的事。每个人都有天赋所在,我们都熟悉“天生”这个词:这个人是天生的交际者,这个人是天生的社交达人,这个人是天生的程序员,这个人是天生的读者。
1:06:10so whatever you are a natural at you want to double down on that and then there are probably multiple things you are natural that because personalities and humans are very complex so we want to be able to take the things所以无论你天生擅长什么,你都要在那上面加倍投入。而且你大概在多个方面都有天赋,因为人格和人都非常复杂。所以我们希望能把你
1:06:23that you are a natural at and combine them so that you automatically just through sheer interest and enjoyment end up top 25 or top 10 or top 5% at a number of things talking about combining skills you said that you天生擅长的事情组合起来,这样你纯粹出于兴趣和享受,就自动在某几件事上进入前 25%、前 10% 或前 5%。说到组合技能,你说
1:06:39should learn to sell learn to build if you can do both you will be unstoppable you know this is a very broad category now but it's too broad categories one is building the product which is hard and it's a multivariate应该学销售、学建造。如果你两样都会,你将势不可挡。你知道,现在这是个非常宽泛的类别,但它是两大类:一是建造产品,这很难,而且是多变量的,
1:06:53that can include design that can include development that can include manufacturing logistics procurement they could even be designing and operating a service it has many many definitions but in every industry there is a definition of the Builder in our tech可以包括设计、开发、制造、物流、采购,甚至可以是设计和运营一项服务。它有很多很多定义,但在每个行业里都有对“建造者”的定义。在我们科技
1:07:08industry that's the CTO as the programmer is the software engineer a hardware engineer but you know even in like a laundry business it could be the person who's building the laundry service who is making the trains run on time who's行业,那是 CTO,是程序员、软件工程师、硬件工程师。但即使在洗衣生意里,也可以是那个建立洗衣服务的人,那个让列车准点运行的人,那个
1:07:20making sure all the clothes end up in the right place the right time and so on then the other side of it is the sales side again selling has a very broad definition selling doesn't actually just mean selling individual customers确保所有衣服在正确的时间到达正确的地方的人,等等。另一边是销售侧。同样,销售的定义也非常宽泛,销售实际上不只是卖给单个客户,
1:07:32but it could mean marketing it could mean communicating it could mean recruiting it could mean raising money it could mean inspiring people it could be doing PR so it's a broad umbrella category so generally the Silicon Valley startup model tends也可以是营销、沟通、招聘、融资、激励人、做公关。所以它是一个宽泛的伞形类别。一般来说,硅谷的创业模式倾向于
1:07:47to work fast it's not the only way but it is probably the most common way when you have two founders one of whom is a world-class at sales and one of whom is world-class at building an example this course Steve快速见效。这不是唯一的方式,但大概是最常见的方式:两个创始人,一个在销售上世界级,一个在建造上世界级。例子当然是 Steve
1:07:59Jobs and Steve Wozniak with Apple gates and Allen probably had similar responsibilities early on with Microsoft Larry and Sergey you know probably broke down along those lines although it's a little different there because that was a very technical product deliveredJobs 和 Steve Wozniak 创办 Apple;Gates 和 Allen 早期在 Microsoft 大概也有类似的分工;Larry 和 Sergey 大概也沿着这条线分工,虽然那里有些不同,因为那是一个非常技术性的产品,通过简单的界面交付给终端用户。
1:08:12to end-users through a simple interface but generally you will see this pattern repeated over and over there's a builder and there's a seller there's a CEO and CTO combo and the venture and Technology investors are almost trained to look for但总的来说,你会看到这个模式反复出现:有一个建造者,有一个销售者;有一个 CEO 和一个 CTO 的组合。风险投资和科技投资人几乎被训练成
1:08:25this combo whenever possible it's the magic combination the ultimate is when one individual can do both that's when you get true superpowers that's when you get people who can create entire industries the living example is Elon Musk he may not尽可能寻找这个组合,这是神奇的组合。终极情况是一个人可以两者都做,那时你就得到了真正的超级能力,那时你就得到了能创造整个行业的人。活生生的例子是 Elon Musk,他可能不
1:08:39necessarily building the Rockets himself but he understands enough that he actually makes technical contributions he understands the technology well enough that no one's gonna snow him on it and he's not running around making claims that he doesn't think he can亲自造火箭,但他懂得足够多,实际上能做出技术贡献;他对技术理解得足够好,没人能在技术上糊弄他;而且他不会到处宣称自己认为最终无法交付的事。
1:08:52eventually deliver he may be optimistic in the timelines but he thinks it's within reasonableness of delivery even Steve Jobs develop enough product skills and was involved enough in the Prada that he also operated both of these domains Larry Ellison starred他在时间表上可能乐观,但他认为那在合理可交付的范围内。连 Steve Jobs 都培养了足够的产品技能,深度参与产品,所以他也在这两个领域同时运作。Larry Ellison 起步
1:09:05as a programmer and I think wrote the first version of Oracle Rosa actually have really involved in it Marc Andreessen was also in this domain he may not have had enough confidence in the sales skills but he was the programmer是程序员,我想他写了 Oracle 的第一版,实际上深度参与其中。Marc Andreessen 也在这个领域——他也许在销售技能上不够自信,但他是那个写 Netscape Navigator 的程序员,写了其中很大一部分。
1:09:16who wrote Netscape Navigator a big chunk of it so I think the real Giants in any field are the people who can both build and sell and usually the building is the thing that like a salesperson can't pick up building所以我认为任何领域里真正的巨人,都是既能建造又能销售的人。通常建造这件事,销售人员后来是捡不起来的——建造需要太多专注的时间;但建造者可以稍后学会销售,尤其如果他本来就
1:09:30later in life it requires too much focused time but a builder can pick up selling a little bit later especially if they were already in Italy wired to be a good communicator Bill Gates famously paraphrase this as I would rather天生是个好的沟通者。Bill Gates 有句著名的转述:我宁愿
1:09:44teach an engineer marketing than a marketer engineering I think if you start out with a building mentality and you have building skills and still early enough in your life or you have enough focused time that you think you can learn教一个工程师做营销,也不愿教一个营销人员做工程。我认为如果你以建造者的心态起步、有建造技能,而且在你人生中还算早、或者你有足够的专注时间,让你觉得自己能学会
1:09:57selling and you have some natural characteristics for your good sales person then you can double down on those now your sales skills could be in a different than traditional domain so for example let's say you're a really good engineer and销售,而且你有一些天生的好销售特质,那你就可以在这些上加固。现在你的销售技能可以不在传统领域,比如假设你是个很好的工程师,
1:10:08then people are saying well now you need to be good at sales well you may not be good at hand-to-hand sales but you may be a really good writer and writing is a skill that can be learned much more easily然后人们说:现在你得擅长销售了。你可能不擅长面对面销售,但你可能是个很好的写作者,而写作是比面对面销售容易学得多的技能,
1:10:18than say in-person selling and so you may just cultivate writing skills until you become a good online communicator and then use that for your sales on the other hand it could just be that you're a good builder and you're bad所以你可能就培养写作能力,直到你成为一个好的线上沟通者,然后用它来做销售。另一方面,也可能你是个好的建造者,但不擅长
1:10:31at writing and you don't like communicate to mass audiences which are good one-on-one so then you might use your sales skills for recruiting or for fundraising which are more one-on-one kinds of endeavors this is pointing out that if you're at写作,也不喜欢面向大众沟通,而是擅长一对一。那你可以把销售技能用在招聘或融资上,这些更是一对一的事情。这说明,如果你处在
1:10:42the intersection of these two don't despair because you're not going to be the best technologist and you're not going to be the best salesperson but in a weird way that combination back to the scott adams skill stack that combination of这两者的交叉点,不要绝望,因为你不会成为最好的技术专家,也不会成为最好的销售人员,但奇怪的是,这种组合——回到 Scott Adams 的技能栈——这种组合
1:10:54two is unstoppable long term people who understand the underlying product and how to build it and can sell it these are catnip to investors these people can break down walls if they have enough energy and they can get almost anything是不可阻挡的。长期来看,那些理解底层产品、知道怎么建造、又能卖的人,对投资人来说就像猫薄荷。这些人只要有足够的能量,就能破墙,几乎能把任何事
1:11:08done if you could only pick one to be good at which one would you pick when you're trying to stand out from the noise bill is actually better because there's so many hustlers and salespeople who have nothing to back them做成。如果只能选一个来擅长,你会选哪个?当你试图从噪音中脱颖而出时,建造其实更好,因为有太多投机者和销售员背后什么都没有,
1:11:20up when you're starting out when you're trying to be recognized building is better but much later down the line building gets exhausting because it is a focused job and it's hard to stay current because there's always new people new products支撑。刚起步、想被认可时,建造更好。但在远为后期,建造会让人疲惫,因为它是一项需要专注的工作,也很难保持前沿,因为总有新人、新产品
1:11:34coming up who have newer tools and frankly more time because it's very intense is very focused tasks so sales skills actually scale better over time like for example if you have a reputation for building a great product that's good but带着更新的工具、坦白说更多时间出现,因为那是非常密集、非常专注的任务。所以销售技能其实随时间更容易规模化。比如,如果你有“做出好产品”的声誉,那很好,但
1:11:48when you ship your new product I'm gonna evaluate it based on the product but if you have a reputation for being a good person to do business with and you're persuasive and communicative then that reputation almost becomes self-fulfilling so I当你发布新产品时,我会根据产品本身来评估它;但如果你有“和你做生意是件好事”的声誉,而且你有说服力、善于沟通,那这份声誉几乎会自我实现。所以我
1:12:01think if you only had to pick one you can start with building and then transition to selling this is a cop-out answer but I think that is actually the right answer before we go and talk about accountability and leverage and认为如果只能选一个,你可以从建造开始,然后转向销售。这是个和稀泥的答案,但我认为那实际上是正确答案。在我们谈问责、杠杆和
1:12:15judgment you've got a few tweets further down the line that I would put in the category of continuous learning they're essentially there is no skill called business avoid business magazines in business class study microeconomics game theory psychology persuasion ethics mathematics判断力之前,你在更下面还有几条推文,我会把它们归入“持续学习”这一类。它们本质上是:没有一种技能叫“商业”。别读商业杂志,别上商业课。学微观经济学、博弈论、心理学、说服、伦理、数学
1:12:34and computers there's one other comment that you made in a periscope that was you should be able to pick up any book in the library and read it and the last tweet in this category was reading as faster than listening和计算机。你在一次 Periscope 里还说过一句话:你应该能从图书馆里拿起任何一本书来读。这一类里最后一条推文是:阅读比听快,
1:12:46doing is faster than watching yeah the most important tweet on this I don't even have in here unfortunately which is the foundation of learning is reading I don't know a smart person who doesn't read and read all the time and做比看快。是的。关于这一点最重要的一条推文,很不幸我甚至没放进来,那就是:学习的基础是阅读。我不认识一个不读书、不一直读书的聪明人。
1:13:00the problem is what do I read how do I read because for most people to struggle it's it's short so the most important thing is just to learn how to educate yourself and the way to educate yourself is to develop问题是:我该读什么?我怎么读?因为对大多数人来说,难就难在这里,很短。所以最重要的是学会如何自我教育,而自我教育的方式是培养
1:13:10a love for reading so the tweet that is left out the one that I was hinting yet is read what you love until you love to read it's that simple everybody I know who reads a lot loves to read and对阅读的热爱。所以我漏掉的那条、我一直暗示的推文是:读你爱读的,直到你爱上阅读。就这么简单。我认识的每个读很多书的人都热爱阅读,
1:13:21they love to read because they read books that they loved it's a little bit of a catch-22 but you want to start off just reading wherever you and then keep building up from there until reading becomes a habit and then他们热爱阅读,是因为他们读自己热爱的书。这有点像是第22条军规式的循环,但你要从随便哪里开始读,然后不断积累,直到阅读成为习惯,然后
1:13:33eventually you will just get bored of a simple stuff so you may start off reading fiction then you might graduate the science fiction then you may graduate to nonfiction then you may graduate to science or philosophy or mathematics or whatever最终你会对简单的东西感到厌倦,所以你可能从小说开始读,然后升级到科幻,再升级到非虚构,再升级到科学、哲学、数学或别的什么。
1:13:45it is but take your natural path and just read the things that interest you until you understand them and then you'll naturally move to the next thing and the next thing in the next thing now there is an exception to但走你自己的自然路径,只读让你感兴趣的东西,直到你理解它们,然后你自然会转向下一个、再下一个、再下一个。现在这里有一个例外,
1:13:56this which is where I was hinting with what things you actually do want to learn which is at some point there's too much out there to read and even reading is full of junk there are actually things you can read就是我刚才暗示的、你真正该学的东西:到了某个时点,外面可读的东西太多了,而且连阅读都充满垃圾。确实有一些东西你可以读,
1:14:06especially early on that will program your brain a certain way and then later things that you read you will decide whether those things were true or false based on the earlier things so it is important that you read foundational things尤其在早期,它们会以某种方式给你的大脑编程;然后你后来读到的东西,你会根据早先读到的东西来判断真假。所以读基础性的东西很重要。
1:14:18and foundational things I would say are the original books in a given field that are very scientific in their nature so for example instead of reading a business book pick up Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations instead of reading a而基础性的东西,我会说是某个领域的原典,它们在性质上非常科学。比如,与其读一本商业书,不如拿起 Adam Smith 的《国富论》;与其读
1:14:31book on biology or evolution that's written today I would pick up Darwin's Origin of Species instead of reading a book on biotech right now that may be very advanced I would just pick up the eighth day of creation by Watson一本今天写的生物学或演化论的书,我会拿起 Darwin 的《物种起源》;与其读一本当下非常前沿的生物技术书,我会拿起 Watson
1:14:43and Crick instead of reading advanced books on what cosmology and what Neil deGrasse Tyson and Stephen Hawking have been saying you can pick up richard fineman six easy pieces and start with basic physics if you understand the basics especially in和 Crick 的《创世纪的第八天》;与其读关于宇宙学、Neil deGrasse Tyson 和 Stephen Hawking 说了什么的高深著作,你可以拿起 Richard Feynman 的《六堂Easy物理课》,从基础物理开始。如果你理解基础,尤其是在
1:14:57mathematics and physics and sciences then you will not be afraid of any book all of us have that memory of when we were sitting in class and we're learning mathematics and it was all logical and all made sense until at数学、物理和科学上,那你就不会害怕任何书。我们都有那样的记忆:坐在教室里学数学,一切都很逻辑、都说得通,直到
1:15:09one point the class moved too fast and we fell behind and then after that we were left memorizing equations memorizing concepts without being able to drive them from first principles and that moment were lost because unless you're professional mathematicians you're某个时刻课程讲得太快,我们跟不上了。从那以后,我们就只能背公式、背概念,无法从第一性原理推导它们。那一刻我们就迷失了,因为除非你是职业数学家,
1:15:24not gonna remember those things all you're gonna remember are the techniques the foundations so you have to make sure that you're building on a steel frame of understanding because you're putting together a foundation for a skyscraper and you're not just你不会记得那些东西。你只会记得技巧和基础。所以你必须确保自己在钢架上搭建理解,因为你是在为一座摩天大楼打地基,而不是仅仅
1:15:37memorizing things because if you're just memorizing things you're lost so the foundations are all true important and the ultimate the ultimat is when you walk into a library and you look at it up and down and you don't fear any在背东西。因为如果你只是在背,你就完了。所以基础全是重要的。而终极境界是:你走进一座图书馆,上下打量,你不害怕任何
1:15:49book you know that you can take any book off the shelf you can read it you can understand it you can absorb what is true you can reject what is false and you have a basis for even working that out一本书。你知道你可以从架上取下任何一本书,你能读它、理解它、吸收其中真实的部分、拒绝虚假的部分,而且你有依据来判断,
1:16:01that is logical and scientific and not purely just based on opinions the beauty of the Internet is the entire Library of Alexandria times 10 is at your fingertips at all times it's not the means of education or the means of那依据是逻辑的、科学的,而不纯粹基于观点。互联网的美妙之处是,整个亚历山大图书馆乘以十倍,随时随地都在你指尖。稀缺的不是教育手段或
1:16:15learning are scarce the means of learning are abundant it's the desire to learn that scarce so you really have to cultivate that desire and it's not even cultivating if to not lose it children have a natural curiosity if you go学习手段,学习手段是丰富的,稀缺的是学习的欲望。所以你必须培养那种欲望。其实甚至不是培养,而是不要失去它。孩子天生有好奇心。如果
1:16:28to a young child who's first learning language they're pretty much always asking what's this what's that why is this who's that they're always asking questions but one of the problems is that schools and our educational system and even our way你去看一个刚开始学语言的幼儿,他几乎总在问:这是什么?那是什么?为什么这样?那是谁?他们总在问问题。但问题之一是,学校、我们的教育体系,甚至我们
1:16:41of raising children replaces curiosity with compliance and once you replace the curiosity with the compliance you get an obedient factory worker but you no longer get a creative thinker and you need creativity you need that ability to feed your own养育孩子的方式,用顺从替换了好奇。一旦你用顺从替换了好奇,你就得到一个听话的工厂工人,但你不再得到有创造力的思考者。而你需要创造力,你需要那种喂养自己
1:16:55brain to learn whatever you want and to me foundational things are principles there are algorithms they're deep-seated logical understanding where you can defend it or attack it from any angle and that's why microeconomics is important because macroeconomics a lot of大脑、学习任何你想学的东西的能力。对我来说,基础性的东西是原理,是算法,是深层的逻辑理解——你可以从任何角度为它辩护或攻击它。这就是微观经济学重要的原因,因为宏观经济学很多是
1:17:13memorization a lot of macro as Nassim Taleb says it is easier to macro than it is 2 micro because macroeconomics is boodoo complex science meets politics you can't find two macro economists to agree on anything these days and different macro记忆。很多宏观——正如 Nassim Taleb 所说,做宏观比做微观容易,因为宏观经济学是巫毒式的复杂科学遇上政治。如今你找不到两个能就任何事达成一致的宏观经济学家,不同的宏观
1:17:27economists get used by different politicians to peddle their different pet theories there are even macro economists out there now peddling something called modern monetary theory which says hey except for this pesky thing called inflation we can just print all the经济学家被不同的政客用来推销各自偏爱的理论。现在甚至有宏观经济学家在推销所谓“现代货币理论”,说:嘿,除了那个讨厌的通胀问题,我们可以想印多少钱就印多少钱。
1:17:39money that we want yes except for this pesky thing called inflation that's like saying instead of limited energy we can fire rockets off into space all day long it's just nonsense but the fact that there are people who have macroeconomists对,除了那个讨厌的通胀问题。这就像说:既然能源有限,我们可以整天往太空发射火箭。这纯属胡说。但有人的头衔里就写着“宏观经济学家”,
1:17:53in their title and are peddling modern monetary theory just tells you that macroeconomics as a so-called science has been corrupted it's a branch of politics so you really want to focus on the foundations foundation the ultimate foundations are mathematics and却在推销现代货币理论,这本身就告诉你:作为一门所谓科学的宏观经济学已经被腐蚀了,它是政治的一个分支。所以你要真正专注于基础。终极的基础是数学和
1:18:06logic if you understand logic and mathematics then you have the basis for understanding scientific method once you understand the scientific method then you can understand how to separate truth from falsehood in other fields and other things that you're reading so逻辑。如果你理解逻辑和数学,你就有了理解科学方法的基础。一旦你理解科学方法,你就能理解如何在其他领域、在你正在读的其他东西里区分真与假。所以
1:18:21be very careful about reading other people's opinions and even be careful about reading facts because so-called facts are often just opinions but you know with a veneer around them what you really are looking for is algorithms but you're really looking读别人的观点要非常小心,甚至读“事实”也要小心,因为所谓的事实往往只是观点,只是外面裹了一层糖衣。你真正要找的是算法,你真正要找的
1:18:35for his understanding it's better to go through a book really slowly and struggled and stumbled and rewind then it is ticks fly through it quickly and say well now I read 20 books ever at 30 books I've read 50 books是理解。慢慢读一本书、挣扎、绊倒、倒回去,比快速翻过去说“好了,我读了 20 本书、30 本书、我读了这个领域的 50 本书”要好。
1:18:47in the field it's like Bruce Lee said I don't fear the man who knows a thousand kicks and a thousand punches I fear the man who's practiced one punch ten thousand times or one kick 10,000 times it's the understanding that就像 Bruce Lee 说的:我不怕练过一千种腿法、一千种拳法的人,我怕的是把一种拳练了一万次、把一种腿法练了一万次的人。真正让你成为聪明思考者的,是
1:19:00comes through repetition and three usage and through logic and foundations that really makes you a smart thinker to lay a foundation for learning for the rest of your life I think you need two things if I was gonna try and通过重复、使用和逻辑、基础得来的理解。要为你余生的学习打下基础,我认为你需要两样东西——如果我试着
1:19:14sum it up one practical persuasion and two you need to go deep in some technical category whether it's abstract math or you want to read Donald Knuth books on algorithms or you want to read fineman's lectures on physics if you总结的话:一是实用的说服力,二是你需要在某个技术类别里深入,不管是抽象数学,还是读 Donald Knuth 关于算法的书,还是读 Feynman 的物理学讲义。如果你
1:19:33have practical persuasion and a deep understanding of some complex topic I think you'll have a great foundation for learning for the rest of your life yeah if I can expand it a little bit I would say that the five most有实用的说服力,又对某个复杂话题有深入理解,我认为你就为余生的学习打下了极好的基础。是的,如果我再展开一点,我会说最重要的五项
1:19:48important skills are of course reading writing arithmetic and then as you are adding in persuasion we're just talking and then finally I would add computer programming just because it's an applied form of arithmetic that just gets you so much leverage技能当然是阅读、写作、算术,然后再加上说服——就是我们正在谈的——最后我会加上计算机编程,因为它只是算术的一种应用形式,在你所从事的任何领域都能给你带来极大的
1:20:03for free in any domain that you operate in if you're good with computers if you're good at basic mathematics you're good at writing if you're good at speaking and if you like reading you're set for life so in that sense免费杠杆。如果你擅长计算机、擅长基础数学、擅长写作、擅长讲话,而且你喜欢阅读,你这辈子就有底了。所以从这个意义上说,
1:20:16business to me is bottom of the barrel there's no actual skilled call business it's too generic of a thing it's like a skill called relating like relating to humans that's not a skill it's too broad so a lot of what商业对我来说是桶底。根本没有一种真正的技能叫“商业”,它太泛了。就像一种叫“与人相处”的技能——和人打交道——那不是技能,它太宽泛了。所以商学院里发生的很多事——
1:20:28goes on in business schools and there's some very intelligent stuff taught in business schools I don't need to track from them completely but some of the stuff that's trying Business School is essentially just anecdotes they call it case studies but商学院里确实教一些非常聪明的东西,我不需要完全否定它们——但商学院里试图做的一些事本质上只是轶事,他们叫它“案例研究”,但
1:20:37it's just anecdotes and they're trying to help you pattern match by throwing lots of data points at you but the reality is you will never understand them fully until you're actually in that position yourself even then you will find that那只是轶事,他们试图通过扔给你大量数据点来帮你做模式匹配。但现实是,除非你自己真的处在那个位置,否则你永远不会完全理解它们。即使到那时,你也会发现
1:20:51basic concepts from game theory and psychology and ethics and mathematics and computers and logic will serve you much much better so I would focus in the foundations I would focus with a science bent I would develop a love for reading博弈论、心理学、伦理、数学、计算机和逻辑的基本概念会对你更有用得多。所以我会聚焦基础,会带着科学的倾向,会培养对阅读的热爱,
1:21:03including by reading so-called junk food that you're not supposed to read you don't have to read the classics that is the foundation for your self education what did you mean when you said that doing is faster than watching when you包括读那些所谓的“垃圾食品”——你不该读的东西。你不必读经典。这就是你自我教育的基础。你说“做比看快”是什么意思?当
1:21:17come to your learning curve if you want to optimize your learning curve one of the reasons why I don't love podcasts even though I'm a generator of podcasts is that I like to consume my information very quickly and now I'm你来到自己的学习曲线前,如果你想优化学习曲线,我不太喜欢播客的原因之一——尽管我自己就是播客的产出者——是我喜欢非常快地消费信息。现在我
1:21:28a good reader a fast reader and I can read very fast but I can only listen at a certain speed I know people listen to 2x 3x but everyone sounds like a chipmunk and it's hard to go back it's hard是个好的阅读者、快速阅读者,我可以读得很快,但听只能以某个速度听。我知道有人用 2 倍、3 倍速听,但每个人听起来都像花栗鼠,而且很难倒回去,很难
1:21:37to highlight it's hard to pinpoint snippets and save them in your notebook and so on similarly a lot of people think they can become really skilled at something by watching others do it or even by reading about others doing it做标记,很难定位片段、存到笔记本里等等。同样,很多人以为可以通过看别人做、甚至通过读别人做,就能在某件事上变得非常熟练,
1:21:49and going back to business school case study that's a classy example you know they study other people's businesses but in reality you're going to learn a lot more about running a business by operating your own lemonade stand or equivalent or回到商学院案例研究的例子,那是个典型的例子:他们研究别人的企业。但现实中,你经营自己的柠檬水摊或类似的东西,或者哪怕只是
1:22:00even opening a little retail store down the street that is how you gonna learn on the job because a lot of the subtleties don't express themselves until you're actually in the business for example everyone's now into mental models these days在街上开一家小零售店,你会学到更多关于经营生意的东西。那是你在职学习的方式,因为很多微妙之处只有你真正进入生意才会显现出来。比如现在每个人都在讲“思维模型”,
1:22:13right you go to Farnam Street you go to poor Charlie's Almanac and you can learn all the different mental models but which ones matter more which ones do you apply more often which matter which circumstances that's actually the hard part对吧?你去 Farnam Street,你去《穷查理宝典》,你可以学到各种不同的思维模型。但哪些更重要?哪些你更常用?在什么情况下重要?那才是难的部分。
1:22:25for example my personal learning has been that the principal-agent problem drives so much in this world it's an incentives problem you know I've learned that tit-for-tat iterated prisoner's dilemma is the piece of game theory that is worth knowing the most比如我个人的学习是:委托—代理问题驱动了这个世界上的太多东西,那是个激励问题。我学到的是:以牙还牙、重复囚徒困境是最值得了解的博弈论知识。
1:22:39you can literally almost put down the game theory book after that finally the best way to learn game theory is to play lots of games I never even read game theory books I consider myself extremely good at game theory I've在那之后你几乎可以把博弈论的书放下。最后,学博弈论最好的方式是玩大量游戏。我甚至没读过博弈论的书。我认为自己极其擅长博弈论。我
1:22:50never opened up a game theory book and found a result in there where I was like oh yeah that's common sense to me because the reason is I just grew up playing all kinds of games and I ran into all从来没有翻开一本博弈论书,看到某个结论后想:哦对,这对我就是常识。原因是,我从小玩各种游戏长大,我在各种朋友之间遇到
1:22:59kinds of corner cases with all kinds of friends and so it's just second nature to me so you can always learn better by doing on the job but the doing is a subtle thing that we're doing in capsule it's a各种边界情况,所以它对我来说是第二天性。所以你总是可以通过在职做事学得更好。但“做”是一件微妙的事,我们刚刚把它压缩了,它有
1:23:11lot so for example let's say I want to learn how to run a business well if I start a business where I go in every day and I'm doing the same thing with Sam running the retail store that Street where很多内容。比如,假设我想学如何经营生意。如果我开一家店,每天进去和 Sam 一起做同样的事,经营街上那家零售店,
1:23:22I'm stocking the shelves with food and liquor every single day I'm not gonna learn that much because I'm repeating things a lot so I'm putting in thousands of hours but there are thousands of hours doing the same thing whereas if每天往货架上摆食品和酒,我不会学到多少,因为我在大量重复。所以我投入了数千小时,但那是数千小时做同样的事。而如果
1:23:33I was putting in thousands of iterations that would be different so the learning curve is across iteration so if I was trying new marketing experiments to store all the time I was constantly changing out the inventory I was constantly changing我投入的是数千次迭代,那就不同了。所以学习曲线是跨迭代的。如果我一直尝试新的营销实验,我不断更换库存,我不断更换
1:23:44out the branding in the messaging I was constantly changing the sign I was constantly changing the online channels that I was used to drive foot traffic in I was experimenting with being open at different hours if I even had the品牌和信息传达,我不断更换招牌,我不断更换用来带来客流的线上渠道,我尝试不同的营业时间,如果我有能力
1:23:56ability to walk around and talk to other store owners and get in their books and figure out how they're running their it's the number of iterations that drives a learning curve so the more iterations you can have the more shots到处走走、和其他店主交谈、看他们的账本、弄清楚他们怎么经营,那是迭代次数驱动学习曲线。所以你能有的迭代越多、射门
1:24:07on goal you can have the faster you're going to learn it's not just about the hours put in it's actually a combination of the two but I think just the way we're built and the way that the world presents itself次数越多,你学得越快。这不仅仅是投入小时数,实际上是两者的结合。但我认为,就我们的构造方式和世界呈现自己的方式而言,
1:24:19the world offers us very easily the opportunity to do the same thing over and over and over again but really we'd be better served if we went off and found ways to do new things from scratch and doing something new世界很容易给我们机会一遍又一遍做同样的事。但实际上,如果我们离开去找到从零做新事情的方法,会更有益。而第一次做新事
1:24:32the first time is painful because you're wandering into unser territory and high odds are that you will fail so you just have to get very comfortable with frequent small failures you know Nassim Taleb and talks about this also he made是痛苦的,因为你走进了未知领域,而且很可能你会失败。所以你必须对频繁的小失败非常自在。Nassim Taleb 也谈过这个,他
1:24:47his fortune his wealth by being a trader who relied upon black swans Nassim Taleb made money by essentially losing little bits of money every day and then once in a blue moon he would make a lot of money when the靠做依赖黑天鹅的交易员赚到了财富。Nassim Taleb 赚钱的方式本质上是每天亏一点小钱,然后偶尔当别人眼中的
1:25:01unthinkable happened for other people where's most people want to make little bits of money every day and in exchange they'll tolerate lots of blow-up risks they'll tolerate going completely bankrupt we're not involved to bleed a little bit every day if不可想象之事发生时,他赚一大笔。而大多数人想每天赚一点小钱,作为交换,他们容忍大量爆仓风险,容忍彻底破产。我们可不参与每天流一点血;如果
1:25:15you're out in the natural environment and you get a cut and you're literally bleeding a little bit every day you will eventually die you have to stop that cut we're evolved for small victories all the time but that becomes very你在自然环境中被划伤,每天真的在流血,你最终会死,你必须止住那道伤口。我们进化成喜欢小胜利、一直有小胜利,但那会变得非常
1:25:25expensive that's where the crowd is that's where the herd is so if you're willing to bleed a little bit every day but in exchange you win big later you will do better that is by the way entrepreneurship entrepreneurs bleed every昂贵。那是人群所在,是羊群所在。所以如果你愿意每天流一点血,作为交换你以后大赢,你会做得更好。顺便说一句,这就是创业:创业者每天
1:25:36day they're not making money they're losing money they're constantly stressed out all the responsibilities upon them but when they win they win big on average they'll make more so why don't we jump into accountability which I thought was pretty interesting都在流血,他们不赚钱,他们在亏钱,他们持续承压,所有责任都在他们身上。但当他们赢了,他们赢得很大,平均而言他们会赚更多。所以我们为什么不跳进“问责”这个话题——我觉得它相当有意思,
1:25:50and I think you have your own unique take on so the first tweet on accountability was embrace accountability and take business risks under your own name Society will reward you with responsibility equity and leverage yeah so to get rich you而且我认为你有自己独特的看法。关于问责的第一条推文是:拥抱问责,以自己的名义承担商业风险。社会会以责任、股权和杠杆回报你。所以要想变富,
1:26:07know you're gonna need leverage and leverage comes in labor it comes in capital or it can come through code or media but most of these like labor and capital people have to give to you for labor somebody has to follow你知道你需要杠杆。杠杆来自劳动力、来自资本,也可以通过代码或媒体获得。但这些大多数——比如劳动力和资本——必须由别人给你。劳动力,必须有人追随
1:26:17you for capital somebody has to give you money or assets to manage or machines so to get these things you to build up credibility and you have to do those under your own name as much as possible which is risky你;资本,必须有人给你钱或资产去管理,或者给你机器。所以要获得这些东西,你必须建立可信度,而且你必须尽可能以自己的名义去做,这有风险。
1:26:27so accountability is a double-edged thing it allows you to take credit when things go well and to bear the brunt of the failure when things go badly so in that sense you know people who are stamping their names on things所以问责是一把双刃剑:事情顺利时它让你拿到功劳,事情糟糕时它让你承担冲击。所以从这个意义上说,那些把名字印在东西上的人
1:26:40aren't foolish they're just confident maybe it turns out to be foolish in the end but if you look at a Kanye or an Oprah or a Trump or an Elon or anyone like that these people can get rich just off不是愚蠢,他们只是自信。也许最终证明是愚蠢的,但如果你看 Kanye、Oprah、Trump、Elon 或任何这样的人,他们光靠
1:26:49their name because their name is such powerful branding you know regardless what you think of Trump you have to realize that the guy was among the best in the world at just branding his name why would you go to Trump名字就能变富,因为他们的名字本身就是强大的品牌。不管你如何看待 Trump,你都必须意识到,这个人在“给自己的名字做品牌”这件事上属于世界顶尖。
1:27:01casino used to because Trump why would you go to Trump Tower because of Trump when it came time to vote I think that a lot of voters just went and said Trump they recognize the name so the name recognition paid你为什么去 Trump 赌场?就因为 Trump。为什么去 Trump Tower?因为 Trump。到了投票的时候,我想很多选民只是走进去说“Trump”,他们认这个名字。所以名字的辨识度得到了
1:27:11off same thing with Oprah she puts her brand on something her name on something and it flies off the shelves and it's like instant validator but these people also take risks for putting their name out there obviously Trump is now回报。Oprah 也一样,她把品牌、名字放在某样东西上,它就卖断货,就像即时认证。但这些人也为把名字放出去承担风险。显然 Trump 现在
1:27:22probably hated by half or more than half of the country and by a big chunk of the world he sticks his name out there by putting your name out there you become a celebrity and fame has many many downsides it's大概被这个国家一半或一半以上的人憎恨,也被世界很大一部分人憎恨。他把名字摆出去;把名字摆出去,你就成了名人,而名气有很多很多下行。
1:27:32better to be anonymous and rich than to be poor and famous but even famous and rich has a lot of downsides associated with it you're always in the public eye so accountability is quite important when you're working to build a做匿名而富有的人,比做贫穷而著名的人更好;但即使既著名又富有,也有很多下行,你永远在公众视野中。所以问责在你打造
1:27:44product or you're working on a team or you're working in a business we are constantly drummed into our heads how important it is to be part of a team and absolutely agree with that a lot of our training socially is产品、在团队里工作、在企业里工作时相当重要。我们不断被灌输团队合作有多重要,我完全同意。我们在社会层面受到的很多训练
1:27:56telling us to not stick our necks out of the crowd this is saying that I hear from Australian friends I like the tall poppy gets cut right don't stick your neck out but I would say that actually a really really都在告诉我们不要从人群中探出头。这是我从澳大利亚朋友那里听到的说法:高罂粟会被割掉,对吧?别把头探出去。但我想说,实际上一个真正
1:28:08well functioning team is small and has clear accountability for each two different portions like so you can say okay this person is responsible for building the product this person is responsible for the messaging this person is responsible for raising money运作良好的团队很小,而且每个不同部分都有清晰的问责。所以你可以说:好,这个人负责打造产品,这个人负责信息传达,这个人负责融资,
1:28:21this person responsible for the pricing strategy and maybe their online advertising so if somebody screws up you know exactly who's responsible what at the same time something goes really well you also know exactly who's responsible so if you have a这个人负责定价策略,也许还有线上广告。所以如果有人搞砸了,你确切知道谁负责;同时如果某件事进展顺利,你也确切知道谁负责。所以如果你有一个
1:28:36small team and you have clearly delineated responsibilities then you can still keep a very high level of accountability and accountability is really important because when something succeeds or fails if it fails everybody points fingers at each other and if it小团队、职责划分清楚,你仍然可以保持很高的问责水平。问责真的很重要,因为当某件事成功或失败时——如果失败,所有人互相指责;如果
1:28:48succeeds everybody steps forward to take credit and we've all had that experience when we were in school and we got like a group assignment to do and there were people in there there were probably a few people in there who成功,所有人都往前站来抢功劳。我们都有过那种经历:在学校做小组作业,里面大概有几个人
1:28:58did a lot of the work and then there are few people who just did a lot of grandstanding or to do the work so we're all familiar with this from a childhood sense but it is uncomfortable to talk about but干了很多活,还有几个人只是在表演、或者在干活。所以我们都从童年就熟悉这种事,但谈起来让人不舒服,但
1:29:07clear accountability is important without accountability you don't have incentives without accountability you can't build credibility but you take risk so you take risk of failure you take risk of humiliation you take risk of failure under your own name which you清晰的问责很重要。没有问责,你就没有激励;没有问责,你就无法建立可信度。但你要承担风险:承担失败的风险,承担被羞辱的风险,以你自己的名义承担失败的风险——
1:29:20know luckily in modern society there's no more debtors prison and people don't go to jail or get executed for losing other people's money but we're still socially hardwired to not fail in public under our own names and the people who你知道,幸运的是现代社会没有债务人监狱了,人们不会因为亏了别人的钱而坐牢或被处死。但我们在社会层面仍然被硬性设定为不要以自己的名义公开失败。而那些
1:29:32have the ability to fail in public under their own names actually gain a lot of power for example I'll give a personal anecdote up until about 2013 2014 my public persona was entirely around startups and investing and only around 2014-2015有能力以自己的名义公开失败的人,实际上获得了很大的力量。比如我举个个人例子:直到 2013、2014 年左右,我的公众形象完全围绕创业和投资,直到 2014-2015 年
1:29:48did I start talking about philosophy and psychological things and broader things and it made me a little nervous because I was doing it under my own name and there were definitely people in the industry who sent me messages through the我才开始谈哲学、心理和更广泛的东西,这让我有点紧张,因为我是以自己的名义在做。行业里确实有人通过
1:30:00back channel like what are you doing you're ending your career this is stupid and I just went with it took a risk same with crypto early on it took a risk but when you put your name out there you take私下渠道给我发消息,说:你在干什么?你在终结自己的职业生涯,这很蠢。而我就是继续做下去了,承担了风险。早期做加密也一样,承担了风险。但当你把名字摆出去、为某些事
1:30:09a risk with certain things you also get to reap the rewards you get the benefits accountability is important because that's how you're going to get leverage that's how you're going to get credibility it's also how you're going to get equity承担风险时,你也能收获回报,得到好处。问责重要,因为那是你获得杠杆的方式,是你获得可信度的方式,也是你获得股权的方式。
1:30:20you're gonna get a piece of the business when you're negotiating with other people ultimately if someone else is making a decision about how to compensate you that decision will be based on how replaceable you are and if you have high在和别人谈判时,你会得到一部分业务。归根结底,如果别人在决定如何补偿你,那个决定会基于你有多可被替换。如果你有很高的
1:30:34accountability that makes you less replaceable and then they have to give you equity which is a piece of the upside but equity itself is a good example because equity is also a risk based instrument equity means you get paid everything问责,那你就更不可被替换,于是他们必须给你股权,也就是一部分上行收益。而股权本身就是个好例子,因为股权也是一种基于风险的工具。股权的意思是,在所有
1:30:47after all the people who need guaranteed money are paid back so if you look at the hierarchy of capital in a company the employees get paid first they get to pay the salary first like in the legal proceedings you know需要保证回报的人被偿付之后,剩下的全归你。所以如果你看一家公司的资本层级,员工最先拿到钱,先付工资,就像法律程序里
1:31:00the salaries are sacrosanct if you are a board member and the company spends too much money and has back salaries to pay the government will go after you personally to pay back the salaries so the employees get the most security工资是神圣不可侵犯的。如果你是董事会成员,公司花了太多钱、还欠着工资,政府会追你个人来偿还工资。所以员工得到最大的保障,
1:31:13but in exchange for that security they don't have as much upside then next in line would be the debt holders who are maybe the bankers who lent money to the company for operations and they need to make their fixed coupon但作为交换,他们的上行有限。接下来是债务持有者,也许是借钱给公司做运营的银行家,他们需要每月或每年拿到固定利息,
1:31:26every month or every year but they don't get much more upside beyond that now they might be making 5 10 15 20 25 % a year but that's where they're upset is limited to and then finally are the equity holders但除此之外没有太多上行。他们可能一年赚 5%、10%、15%、20%、25%,但他们的上行就封顶在那里。最后是股权持有者,
1:31:37and these people are actually gonna get most of the upside so once the debt holders are paid off and the salaries are paid off whatever remains goes to them but if there isn't enough money to pay off the salaries and这些人实际上会拿到大部分上行。所以一旦债务持有者被偿付、工资被付清,剩下的一切都归他们。但如果没有足够的钱付工资和
1:31:48the debt holders or if there's just enough to pay off the salary the debt holders which is what happens with most businesses most of the times the equity holders get nothing so the equity holders take on greater risk but then债务持有者,或者刚好只够付工资和债务持有者——大多数企业大多数时候就是这样——股权持有者就什么都拿不到。所以股权持有者承担更大风险,但作为
1:31:59they take on in exchange they get nearly unlimited upside and you can do the same with all of your work so essentially taking accountability for your actions is the same as taking an equity position in all of your work you're交换,他们得到几乎无限的上行。你在所有工作中也可以这样做。所以本质上,为自己的行为承担问责,就等于在你的全部工作中持有股权。你
1:32:12essentially taking greater downside risk and greater upside risk but realize that in modern society the downside risk is not that large you know even personal bankruptcy can wipe the debts clean in good ecosystems I'm most familiar with Silicon Valley but本质上是在承担更大的下行风险和更大的上行风险。但你要意识到,在现代社会,下行风险并没有那么大。连个人破产在好的生态系统里都能把债务一笔勾销,我最熟悉的是硅谷,但
1:32:26generally people will forgive failures as long as you are honest and made a high integrity effort so there's not really that much to fear in terms of failure and so people should be taking on a lot more accountability than they一般来说,只要你诚实、做出了高诚信的努力,人们会原谅失败。所以失败其实没什么好怕的,人们本该承担比现在多得多的问责。
1:32:38actually are is accountability actually fragile or do you really just mean that we're hardwired not to fail in public so it just feels like it's a fragile thing I think it could actually be fragile like example of accountability is you're问责真的脆弱吗?还是说你想表达的只是:我们天生就不愿公开失败,所以它感觉上很脆弱?我认为它确实可能脆弱。问责的一个例子是,你是
1:32:53an airplane pilot but as a captain you're taking on accountability for the entire plane let's say that something goes wrong with the aircraft you can't literal a mitt on anyone else you can't blame it on the steward or the stewardess一名飞行员,但作为机长,你对整架飞机承担问责。假设飞机出了问题,你不能怪到任何人头上,你不能怪乘务员,
1:33:05you can't blame it on the you're the captain you're responsible for the ship and if you screw up you crash the ship and there are immediate consequences in the old days you know the captain was expected to go down with你不能怪别人——你是机长,你对这艘船负责。如果你搞砸了,你就把飞机摔了,后果是即时的。在过去,机长被期望与船同沉,
1:33:15the ship if the ship was sinking literally the last person who got to get off was the captain so yeah I think accountability does come with real risks but we're talking about in a business context so the risk here would如果船在下沉,字面意义上最后一个离开的人是机长。所以是的,我认为问责确实伴随真实风险。但我们现在谈的是商业语境,这里的风险会是
1:33:26be that you would probably be the last one to get your capital back out you'd be the last one to get paid for your time so you know the time that you put in the capital that you put in into你大概是最后一个拿回资本的人,你是最后一个为自己的时间拿到报酬的人。所以你投入的时间、投入公司的资本,
1:33:35the company these are what are at risk even if a business fails then your names on it that's not as bad as if it turns out to be an integrity issue like your Bernie Madoff for example Madoff investments that name这些都在风险中。即使企业失败,你的名字还在上面,但那还不算最糟;最糟的是它变成诚信问题,比如 Bernie Madoff。Madoff 投资那个名字
1:33:47is never going to be good again in the investment community you could be Bernie Madoff's great-great-great-grandson you're not gonna go into the investment business cuz you ruin the family name so I think these days the accountability risk with the name在投资界永远不会再好起来。你可能是 Bernie Madoff 的曾曾曾孙,你也没法进入投资行业,因为你毁了家族名声。所以我认为如今名字带来的问责风险
1:33:59happens more around integrity rather than it does around purely economic failure the big takeaway for me on accountability is that you will be rewarded directly in proportion with your accountability I also think this is why people like tala rail against更多关乎诚信,而不是纯粹的经济失败。对我来说,关于问责最大的收获是:你会以与问责完全成比例的方式得到回报。我也认为这就是为什么像 Taleb 这样的人痛斥
1:34:17CEOs who get rewards without accountability yeah I mean Telep skin in the game is required reading if you want to get anywhere in Modern Life and understand how modern systems work then a scale of the game would be near top那些拿回报却不承担问责的 CEO。是的,我是说 Taleb 的《利益攸关》是必读书。如果你想在现代生活中有所作为、理解现代系统如何运作,那本书会排在我的
1:34:30of my list to read but yes accountability skin of the game these concepts go very closely I think of accountability as reputational skin in the game it's putting your personal reputation on the line as skin in the game accountability is阅读清单很前面。但没错,问责、利益攸关,这些概念紧密相连。我把问责看作声誉上的利益攸关:把你的个人声誉押上去,当作利益攸关。问责是
1:34:44a simple concept the only part of accountability that may be a little counterintuitive is that we're currently socially brainwashed to not take on accountability not in a visible way but I think there are ways to take on accountability where every一个简单的概念。问责唯一可能有点反直觉的部分是:我们目前在社会层面被洗脑,不愿承担问责。不是以显眼的方式,但我认为有办法承担问责,让每个
1:34:59member of a team can take on accountability for their portion and that is how you get a well-functioning team while still putting credits and losses in the correct columns so why don't we talk a little bit about leverage the first团队成员都为自己那一部分承担问责,这样你既能得到运作良好的团队,又能把功劳和损失记在正确的栏目里。那我们为什么不聊聊杠杆?这条推文串里的第一条
1:35:12tweet in the storm was a famous quote from Archimedes which was give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth the next tweet was fortunes require leverage business leverage comes from capital people是 Archimedes 的一句名言:给我一个足够长的杠杆和一个支点,我就能撬动地球。下一条推文是:财富需要杠杆。商业杠杆来自资本、人
1:35:28and products with no marginal costs of replication leverage is critical the reason I stuck in Archimedes quote in there is normally I don't like putting other people's quotes in my Twitter like that doesn't add any value you can go look和复制边际成本为零的产品。杠杆至关重要。我把 Archimedes 那句话塞进去的原因是,通常我不喜欢在推特上放别人的名言,那不会增加任何价值,你可以自己去查
1:35:40up those people's quotes but this court I had to put in there because it's just so fundamental I read it when I was very very young and it had a huge impression on me and we all know what leverage is那些人的名言。但这句话我必须放进去,因为它太根本了。我很小的时候读到它,它给我留下巨大印象。我们都知道杠杆是什么,
1:35:50when we use a seesaw or a lever we understand how that works physically but I think what our brains aren't really well evolved to comprehend is how much leverage is possible in modern society and what the newest forms of leverage当我们用跷跷板或杠杆时,我们理解它在物理上如何运作。但我认为我们的大脑并没有很好地进化到能理解:现代社会中杠杆可以有多大,以及最新的杠杆形式
1:36:04are and so the oldest form of leverage is labor which is people working for you so instead of me lifting rocks I can have 10 people lift rocks then just by my guidance and where the rocks should go a lot是什么。最古老的杠杆形式是劳动力,就是为你工作的人。所以与其我自己搬石头,我可以让十个人搬石头,然后只要我指引方向、告诉他们石头该去哪儿,就有多得多的
1:36:16more rocks get moved and I could do myself everybody understands this because we're evolved to understand the labor a form of leverage and so what happens is society overvalues labour as a form of leverage this is why your parents are石头被搬走,而不是我一个人搬。每个人都理解这一点,因为我们进化出了对劳动力这种杠杆形式的理解。于是社会高估了劳动力这种杠杆,这就是为什么你的父母
1:36:28impressed when you get a promotion and you have lots of people working underneath you this is why when a lot of naive people we tell them about your company they'll say how many people work there they'll use that as a在你升职、手下有很多人时会很佩服。这就是为什么很多天真的人听说你的公司时,会问“那里有多少人工作”,他们把这当作
1:36:37way to establish credibility they're trying to measure how much leverage and impact you actually have or when someone starts a movement they'll say how many people they have or how big the army is we just automatically assume that more people建立可信度的方式,试图衡量你实际拥有多少杠杆和影响力。或者当某人发起一场运动时,他们会说他们有多少人、军队有多大。我们就是会自动假设人越多
1:36:48is better but I would argue that this is the worst form of leverage that you could possibly use managing other people is incredibly messy it requires tremendous leadership skills you're one short hop from a mutiny or getting eaten or torn越好。但我想说,这是你能使用的最糟糕的杠杆形式。管理别人极其混乱,需要极强的领导力,你离哗变,或者被吃掉、被
1:37:01apart by the mob it's incredibly competed over entire civilizations have been destroyed over this fight for example communism Marxism is all about the battle between capital and labor that's capital law and that's labor right so it's a trap so you暴民撕碎,只有一步之遥。这个位置的争夺极其激烈,整个文明都曾因这场斗争被摧毁。比如共产主义、马克思主义,全都是关于资本与劳动的战争——那是资本,那是劳动。所以这是个陷阱。
1:37:16really want to stay out of labor based leverage you want the minimum amount of people working with you that are going to allow you to use the other forms of leverage but HR you are much more interesting the second type所以你真正要避开以劳动力为基础的杠杆。你要让和你一起工作的人数最少,只要能让你使用其他形式的杠杆就行。但资本要有意思得多。第二种
1:37:29of leverage is capital and this one's a little less hardwired into us because large amounts of money moving around and being saved and being invested in money markets these are inventions of human beings the last few hundred to few thousand杠杆是资本。这一种在我们身上没那么本能,因为大量资金流动、被储蓄、被投入货币市场,这些是人类在过去几百年到几千年
1:37:41years they're not evolved with us from hundreds of thousands of years so we understand them a little bit less well they probably require more intelligence to use correctly and the ways in which we use them keep changing management skills from的发明。它们不是伴随我们几十万年进化来的,所以我们对它们理解得差一些,它们大概需要更多智慧才能正确使用,而且我们使用它们的方式一直在变。一百年前的
1:37:56a hundred years ago might still apply to but investing in the stock market skills from a hundred years ago probably don't apply to the same level today so capital is a trickier form of leverage to you this poor modern it's管理技能可能还适用,但一百年前在股市投资的技能,大概在今天不能以同等水平适用。所以资本是一种更难掌握的杠杆形式。
1:38:06the one that people have used to get fabulously wealthy in the last century it's probably been the dominant form of leverage in the last century and you can see this by who are the richest people it's bankers politicians and corrupt在过去的世纪里,人们正是用它变得极其富有,它大概是上个世纪的主导杠杆形式。你可以从谁是最富有的人看出来:银行家、政客,以及印钱的腐败
1:38:16countries who print money especially people who move large amounts of money around and if you look at the top of very large companies outside of technology companies in many many large old companies the CEO job is really a financial job国家,尤其是那些调动大笔资金的人。而如果你看很多大型老公司——科技公司之外——的顶层,CEO 这份工作其实是财务工作,
1:38:32they're really financial asset managers now sometimes an asset measuring can put a pleasant face on it so you get a Warren Buffett type but deep down I think we all dislike capital as a form of leverage because it feels unfair他们实际上是金融资产管理人。有时资产管理人会给自己安一张讨喜的脸,于是你得到 Warren Buffett 那种类型。但内心深处,我想我们都不喜欢资本作为一种杠杆,因为它感觉不公平,
1:38:44because it's this invisible thing that can be accumulated and passed across generations and suddenly seems to result in people having gargantuan amounts of money with nobody else kind of around them or Nestle sharing in it that said Capital is a因为它是这种无形的东西,可以被积累、跨代传递,然后突然导致一些人拥有巨额资金,而身边没有别人分享。话虽如此,资本是一种
1:38:58powerful form of leverage it can be converted to labor it can be converted to other things it's very surgical very analytical if you are a brilliant investor and give a billion dollars and you can make a 30 percent return with强大的杠杆形式,它可以转化成劳动力,可以转化成其他东西。它非常精准、非常分析性。如果你是个出色的投资人,给你十亿美元,你能赚 30% 的回报,
1:39:11it where's anybody else can only make a 20 percent return you're gonna get all the money and you're gonna get paid very handsomely for it it scales very very well if you get good at managing capital you can manage more而别人只能赚 20%,那所有钱都会给你,你会为此得到非常丰厚的报酬。它规模化得非常好。如果你擅长管理资本,你可以管理越来越多
1:39:21and more capital much more easy they can manage more and more people so it is a good form of leverage but the hard part of capital is how do you obtain it and that's why I talked about specific knowledge and资本,比管理越来越多的人容易得多。所以它是一种好的杠杆形式。但资本的难点在于:你怎么获得它?这就是为什么我先讲特定知识和
1:39:31accountability first if you have specific knowledge in a domain and if you're accountable and you have a good name in that domain then people are going to give you capital as a form of leverage that you can use to then问责。如果你在某个领域有特定知识,如果你承担问责、在那个领域有好名声,那人们就会把资本作为一种杠杆给你,你可以用它去
1:39:41go get more capital so but capital also is fairly well understood and I think a lot of the knocks against capitalism come because of the accumulation of capital the most interesting and the most important form of leverage is this idea获得更多资本。但资本也被理解得比较充分,我认为很多对资本主义的抨击来自资本的积累。而最有趣、最重要的杠杆形式,是
1:39:53of products that have no marginal cost of replication this is the new form of leverage this was only invented in the last few hundred years it got started with the printing press and accelerated broadcast media and now it's really blown复制边际成本为零的产品这个想法。这是新的杠杆形式,它只在过去几百年被发明出来,从印刷机开始,被广播媒体加速,现在随着互联网和代码真正爆发。
1:40:07up with the internet with code so now you can multiply you or efforts without having to involve other humans and without needing money from other humans this podcast is a form of leverage long ago I would have had to sit所以现在你可以复制你自己、复制你的努力,不必牵涉其他人,也不需要别人的钱。这个播客就是一种杠杆。很久以前,我得坐在
1:40:20in a lecture hall and lecture each of you personally and I would have maybe reached a few hundred people and that would have been that 30 years ago I would have to be lucky to get on TV which is somebody讲演厅里,亲自对你们每个人讲课,也许只能触达几百人,仅此而已。30 年前,我得上电视才走运,而那是别人的
1:40:29else's leverage they would have distorted the message that would taken the economics out of it or charged me for it they would have muddled the message and I would have been lucky to get that form of leverage but today thanks杠杆。他们会扭曲信息,会把经济学从中拿走,或者向我收费,他们会把信息搅乱,而我能得到那种杠杆就算走运了。但今天,多亏
1:40:38to the internet I can buy a cheap microphone hook it up to a laptop or an iPad and there you are all so this newest form of leverage is where all the new fortunes were made so all the new billionaires互联网,我可以买一个便宜的麦克风,接到笔记本电脑或 iPad 上,然后你们就都在这里了。所以最新的杠杆形式,是所有新财富被创造的地方,所有新的亿万富翁
1:40:49the last generation fortunes were made by capital that was a warren buffett's of the world but the new generation fortunes are all made through code or media Joe Rogan making 50 to 100 million bucks a year from his podcast PewDiePie上一代的财富是由资本创造的,是 Warren Buffett 那些人;而新一代的财富全都通过代码或媒体创造。Joe Rogan 靠播客一年赚五千万到一亿美元,PewDiePie
1:41:04I don't know how much money he's rolling in but he's bigger than the news right the fortnight players of course Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg and Larry Page and Sergey Brin and Bill Gates and Steve Jobs that is all code我不知道他赚多少钱,但他比新闻还大。当然还有 Fortnite 玩家、Jeff Bezos、Mark Zuckerberg、Larry Page、Sergey Brin、Bill Gates、Steve Jobs——那全是基于
1:41:16based leverage now the beauty is when you combine all of these three that's where tech startups really excel where you take just the minimum but highest output labor that you can get which are engineers and designers product developers and then代码的杠杆。而美妙之处在于,当你把这三种全部结合起来,那才是科技创业公司真正擅长的:你取最少但产出最高的劳动力,也就是工程师、设计师、产品开发者,然后
1:41:32you add in use that for marketing advertising scaling and you add in lots of code and media and podcasts and content to get it all out there that is a magic combination and that's why you see technology startups explode out你就用它做营销、广告、规模化;再加上大量代码、媒体、播客和内容,把一切铺出去。这才是神奇的组合,也是为什么你会看到科技创业公司凭空爆发、
1:41:47of nowhere use massive leverage and just make huge outside returns do you want to talk a little bit about permissioned versus permissionless probably the most interesting thing to keep in mind about the new forms of leverage is their permission less使用巨大杠杆,然后创造巨大的超额回报。你想聊聊“需要许可”与“无需许可”的杠杆吗?关于新杠杆形式,最值得记住的一点大概是:它们无需许可。
1:42:02they don't require somebody else's permission for you to use them or succeed for labor leverage somebody has to decide to follow you for capital leverage somebody has to give you money to invest or to turn into a product but coding你不需要别人的许可才能使用它们或成功。劳动力杠杆,必须有人决定追随你;资本杠杆,必须有人给你钱去投资或变成产品;但写代码、
1:42:15writing books recording podcasts tweeting youtubing these kinds of things these are permissionless you don't need anyone's permission to do them and that's why they're very terian they're great equalizers of leverage and as much as people may rail on Facebook and写书、录播客、发推、做 YouTube,这类事情无需许可,你不需要任何人的批准就能做。这就是为什么它们极其平等主义,是杠杆的伟大平衡器。不管人们怎么抨击 Facebook 和
1:42:30YouTube they're not gonna stop using it because this permissionless leverage where everyone can be a broadcaster it's just too good the same way you know you can rail upon Apple for having a slightly closed ecosystem in the iPhone but everyone'sYouTube,他们不会停止使用它,因为这种无需许可的杠杆——每个人都能成为广播者——实在太好了。同样,你可以抨击 Apple 的 iPhone 生态有点封闭,但每个人都在
1:42:41writing apps for it and so as long as you can write apps for it you can get rich or reach users doing that why not I think of all the forms of leverage the best one in modern society and people为它写应用。所以只要你能为它写应用,你就能靠这个变富或触达用户,何乐而不为?我认为在所有杠杆形式中,现代社会最好的一种——人们
1:42:52gonna this is glib this is a little overused but and this is why I tell people learn to code right it's that we have this idea that in the future there's gonna be these robots and they're gonna be doing everything会说这有点油滑、有点被用滥了——但这就是为什么我告诉人们去学编程。因为我们有这样一种想法:未来会有这些机器人,它们会做一切事。
1:43:02and that may be true but I would say the majority the robot revolution has already happened the robots are already here and there are way more robots than they're humans it's just that we packed them in data centers for heat这也许是真的。但我想说,机器人革命大部分已经发生了。机器人已经在这里了,而且机器人的数量远远多于人类。只是出于散热
1:43:12and efficiency reasons we put them in servers they're inside the computers all the circuits it's a robot mind inside that's doing all the work and so every great software developer for example now has an army of robots working for him和效率的考虑,我们把它们塞进数据中心,放进服务器里。它们在计算机内部,在所有电路里,那里面有一个机器人大脑在做所有的工作。所以比如每个伟大的软件开发者,现在都有一支机器人大军为他工作,
1:43:25at nighttime while he or she sleeps after they've written the code and it's just cranking away so the robots army is already here the robot revolution has already happened we're about halfway through it we're just adding in much more of在他或她睡着的时候、在写完代码之后的夜里,机器还在不停运转。所以机器人大军已经在这里了,机器人革命已经发生了,我们大概走完了一半,我们现在只是加入更多
1:43:37the hardware component these days as we get more familiar we get more comfortable with the idea of autonomous vehicles and autonomous airplanes an autonomous ships and maybe autonomous trucks and you know their delivery BOTS and Boston Dynamics robots and all硬件成分。随着我们越来越熟悉、越来越适应自动驾驶汽车、自动驾驶飞机、自动船只,也许还有自动驾驶卡车,以及送货机器人、Boston Dynamics 的机器人等等,
1:43:50that but robots who are doing web searching for you for example are already here you know the ones who are like cleaning up your video and audio and transmitting it around the world are already here the ones who are answering但那些已经在为你做网页搜索的机器人,已经在这里了;那些帮你清理视频和音频、把它们传遍全世界的机器人,已经在这里了;那些在回答
1:44:01many customer service queries things that you would have had to call human for are already here so an army of robots is already here it's very cheaply available and the bottleneck is just figuring out intelligent and interesting things to do大量客服问题的机器人——以前你得打电话找人工——已经在这里了。所以一支机器人大军已经在这里,成本非常低,瓶颈只在于想出聪明、有趣的事情
1:44:14to them and essentially you can order this army of robots around just the commands have to be issued in a computer language in the language that they understand so these robots aren't very smart they have to be told very precisely让它们去做。本质上,你可以指挥这支机器人大军,只是命令必须用计算机语言、用它们能理解的语言发出。所以这些机器人并不聪明,必须非常精确地告诉
1:44:25what to do and how to do it so coding is such a great superpower because now you can speak the language of the robot armies and you can tell them what to do and I think at this point actually people它们做什么、怎么做。所以编程是这么强大的超级能力:因为现在你能说机器人大军的语言,你能告诉它们该做什么。而且我觉得到这个时候,人们
1:44:36are not only commanding the arm robots within servers through code they're actually manipulating the movement of trucks of other people just ordering a package on Amazon you're manipulating the movement of many people and many robots they get a package delivered不仅通过代码指挥服务器里的机器人大军,他们实际上在操纵卡车的移动、操纵别人的行动。你只要在 Amazon 上下单一个包裹,你就在操纵许多人和许多机器人的移动,让他们把包裹送到
1:44:52to you people are doing the same things to build businesses now so there's the army of robots within servers and then there's also an army of actual robots and people that are being manipulated through software labor and capital are much你手上。现在人们做同样的事来建立企业。所以服务器里有一支机器人大军,同时也有一支真实的机器人和人的大军,通过软件被操控。劳动力和资本则远
1:45:06less egalitarian not just in their inputs but in their outputs let's say that I need something that humans have to provide like if I want a massage or if I need like someone to cook my food the more of a没那么平等,不仅是在投入上,也是在产出上。假设我需要一些必须由人来提供的东西,比如我想做按摩,或者我需要有人给我做饭,那么这项服务中
1:45:17human element there is in providing that service the less egalitarian it is Jeff Bezos probably has much better vacations and most of us right because he has lots of humans running around doing whatever he needs to do but if you人的成分越多,它就越不平等。Jeff Bezos 的假期大概比我们大多数人好得多,因为他身边有很多人跑来跑去为他做任何需要的事。但如果你
1:45:30look at the output of code in media Jeff Bezos doesn't get to watch better movies and TV than we do Jeff Bezos doesn't get to even have a better computing experience like Google doesn't give him some premium special Google account看代码和媒体的产出,Jeff Bezos 并不能看到比我们更好的电影和电视;Jeff Bezos 甚至没有更好的计算体验——Google 不会给他一个高级特别的 Google 账户,
1:45:42where his searches are better it's the nature of code and media output that the same product is accessible to everybody and it turned into a positive sum game where if Jeff Bezos is consuming the same product as a thousand other让他的搜索更好。这就是代码和媒体产出的本质:同一个产品对所有人都可及,于是它变成正和游戏——如果 Jeff Bezos 消费的同一款产品和另外一千个人一样,
1:45:55people that products would be better than the version that Jeff would consume on his own whereas with other products that's not true if you look at something like buying a Rolex which is no longer about telling time it's a signalling那款产品会比 Jeff 独自消费的版本更好。而其他产品就不是这样。比如买一块 Rolex,它已经不再是用来看时间的,而是一种信号
1:46:07good it's all about showing off I have a Rolex that's a zero-sum game if everybody in the world is wearing a Rolex then people don't want to wear Rolex is anymore because they're no longer signal it's canceled out the effect商品,完全是为了炫耀“我有一块 Rolex”。那是零和游戏:如果世界上每个人都戴 Rolex,人们就不想再戴 Rolex 了,因为它不再是信号,效应被抵消
1:46:17and so rich people do have an advantage in consuming that product they'll just price it up till only they can have Rolexes and then poor people can have relaxes and relaxes resume they're signalling value but something like watching Netflix or了。所以富人在消费那种产品时确实有优势,他们会把价格抬到只有他们买得起 Rolex。而像看 Netflix、
1:46:29using Google or using Facebook or YouTube or even frankly modern-day cars like rich people don't have better cars they just have weirder cars you can't drive a Lamborghini on the street at any speed that makes sense for a Lamborghini so用 Google、用 Facebook、YouTube,甚至坦白说现代汽车——富人并没有更好的车,他们只是有更奇怪的车。你没法在街上把 Lamborghini 开到任何一个配得上 Lamborghini 的速度,所以
1:46:44it's actually a worse car in the street it just turned into a signaling good at that point your sweet spot where you want to be is somewhere like a Tesla Model 3 or like Carola is an amazing car a new它在街上其实是更差的车,到那个地步它只是一种信号商品。你真正该待的甜蜜点,是 Tesla Model 3 那样的车,或者 Corolla——那是辆很棒的车,一辆新
1:46:55Toyota Corolla is a really nice car but because it's mainstream the technology has amortized the cost of production over the largest number of consumers possible and the best products tend to be at the center at the sweet spot the middle-classToyota Corolla 是非常好的车。但因为它主流,技术把生产成本摊薄到尽可能多的消费者身上,而最好的产品往往在最中心、在甜蜜点,在中产
1:47:07rather than being targeted at the upper-class so I think one of the things that we don't necessarily is as the forms of leverage have gone from being human based labour based and being capital based to being more product in code而不是瞄准上层。所以我认为有一件事我们未必意识到:随着杠杆形式从以人为基础、以劳动力为基础、以资本为基础,转向更多以产品、代码
1:47:19and media base that most of the goods and services that we consume are becoming much more egalitarian in their consumption even food is becoming that way like food is becoming cheap and abundant at least in the first world too much和媒体为基础,我们消费的大部分商品和服务在消费层面正变得越来越平等。连食物都是这样——食物正变得便宜而丰富,至少在第一世界,丰富到
1:47:31so to our detriment Jeff Bezos isn't Nestle eating better of food he's just eating different food or he's eating like food that's prepared and served fee at Wrigley so it's almost like more again that human element performance but the labor对我们有害。Jeff Bezos 也并没有必然吃得更好,他只是吃不同的食物,或者吃那种经过备制、由人端上来的食物,所以那又更像是人的成分……但劳动力
1:47:43element out of food production has gone down massively the capital element has gone down massively and so even food production itself has become more technology oriented and so the gap between the haves and the have-nots is getting smaller so if粮食生产里的人工要素大幅下降了,资本要素也大幅下降了,所以连粮食生产本身都变得更偏向技术。于是富人和穷人之间的差距在缩小。所以,如果
1:47:56you care about ethics in wealth creation it is better to create your wealth using code and media as leverage because then those products are equally available to everybody as opposed to trying to create your wealth through labor or capital because你在乎财富创造中的伦理问题,那最好用代码和媒体作为 leverage 来创造财富,因为这样的产品对所有人都是平等可得的,而不是试图通过劳动力或资本来创造财富,因为
1:48:10what I'm referring to here is scale economies technology products and media products have such amazing scale economies that you always want to use the product that is used by the most people the one that's used by the most people ends我在这里指的是规模经济。技术产品和媒体产品的规模经济太惊人了,所以你总是想用最多人用的那个产品。而最多人用的那个产品,最终
1:48:26up having the largest budget there's no marginal cost of adding another user and so with the largest budget you get the highest quality so the best TV shows are actually not gonna be some obscure ones just made for a few会拥有最大的预算——增加一个用户没有边际成本——有了最大的预算,你就能得到最高的质量。所以最好的电视剧其实不会是那些冷门的、只做给少数
1:48:37rich people they're gonna be the big budget ones like the game of thrones with the Breaking Bad or bird box where they have massive massive budgets they can just use those budgets to get to a certain quality level and then富人看的东西;它们会是大预算的作品,像《权力的游戏》《绝命毒师》或者《蒙上你的眼》,它们有非常非常庞大的预算,直接用这些预算把质量堆到某个水平。然后
1:48:48the rich people to be different they have to fly to Sundance and watch a documentary because you and I aren't gonna fly the Sundance because you know that's something that bored rich people do to show off and we're not gonna富人们为了显得不一样,就得飞去圣丹斯电影节看纪录片,因为你我都不会飞去圣丹斯——因为你知道那是无聊的有钱人用来炫耀的事——我们也不会
1:48:58watch a documentary because Muslims aren't actually even that good right again if you're wealthy today for large classes of things you spend your money on signaling goods to show other people that you're wealthy and you try and convert them to去看纪录片,因为纪录片其实也没那么好,对吧。再说一次,如果你今天很有钱,对很大一类东西来说,你花钱买的是信号性商品,用来向别人展示你有钱,然后你试图把它们转化成
1:49:11status as opposed to actually consuming the goods for their own sake people and capital as a form of leverage have a negative externality and code and product have a positive externality attached to them if I was going to sum up地位,而不是真的为了消费这些商品本身。人和资本作为一种 leverage 形式带有负外部性,而代码和产品则附带正外部性。如果要我总结
1:49:25your point I think that capital and labor are also starting to become a little more permissionless or at least the permissioning is diffuse because of the internet so instead of labour we have community now which is diffused form of labour你的观点:我觉得资本和劳动力也开始变得稍微更不需要许可了,或者至少许可变得分散了,因为互联网。所以现在取代劳动力的是社群,一种分散形式的劳动力。
1:49:41for example Mark Zuckerberg has a billion people doing work for him by using Facebook and instead of going to raise capital from someone who's rich now we have crowdfunding so you can raise millions and millions of dollars for a charity比如 Mark Zuckerberg 通过 Facebook 让十亿人在为他工作;而不用再去找某个富人融资,现在有众筹,你可以为一个慈善项目、
1:49:56for a health problem or for a business you can do it all online so capital and labor are also becoming permissionless and you don't need to necessarily do it the old-fashioned way where you have to go around and ask people一个健康问题或者一门生意筹到成百上千万美元,全都在线上完成。所以资本和劳动力也正在变得不需要许可,你不必非得用老一套方式,到处去求人
1:50:09for permission to use their money or their time one more question about leverage do you think a choice of business model or our choice of product can also bring a kind of leverage to it for example pursuing a business that给你许可,让你用他们的钱或他们的时间。再问一个关于 leverage 的问题:你觉得商业模式的选择,或者产品的选择,是不是也能带来某种 leverage?比如去做一门
1:50:23has Network effects pursuing a business that has brand effects or other choices of business model that people could manipulate that just give you free leverage yeah there's some really good micro economic concepts that are important to understand one of those带网络效应的生意,做一门有品牌效应的生意,或者其他人们可以主动利用、直接给你免费 leverage 的商业模式?是的,有一些非常好的微观经济学概念值得理解,其中一个是
1:50:40are scale economies which is the more you produce is something the cheaper it gets to make it that's something that a lot of businesses have basic economics 101 and you should try and get into a business we're making widget number规模经济,也就是你生产得越多,单件成本就越低。很多生意都有这个,这是经济学入门课的内容。你应该尽量进入这样一门生意:制造第
1:50:5112 is cheaper than making widget number 5 and making widget number 10,000 is a lot cheaper than the previous ones and this builds up an automatic sort of barrier to entry against competition and getting commoditized so that's an important one12 个小部件比制造第 5 个更便宜,制造第 10,000 个又比前面那些便宜得多。这就自动形成了一种进入壁垒,挡住竞争和商品化。所以这个概念很重要。
1:51:02another one this is along the same lines but technology products especially and media products have this great quality where they have zero marginal cost of reproduction so creating another copy what you just created is free so when somebody listens this另一个相关的概念:技术产品,尤其是媒体产品,有一个很棒的特性——复制成本为零。所以再复制一份你刚做出来的东西是免费的。所以当有人听这
1:51:17podcast or watches a YouTube video up this it doesn't cost me anything but the next person who shows up those zero marginal cost things they take a while to get going because you make very little money per user but over个播客、或者看这个 YouTube 视频时,我不花一分钱。但下一个出现的人——这些零边际成本的东西需要一段时间才能起来,因为每个用户身上你赚得很少,但随
1:51:29time they can really really add up so Joe Rogan is working no harder on his current podcast and he wasn't podcast number one but on podcast number 1100 he's making a million dollars for the podcast where's for the previous one着时间推移,它们真的能累积起来。所以 Joe Rogan 做现在这期播客并没有比之前更费力,第一期也不是这样,但到第 1100 期,他靠播客能赚一百万美元,而之前那期
1:51:41he probably lost money for the first one that's an example of zero marginal cost and then the most subtle but the most important is this idea of network effects and it comes from computer networking Bob Metcalfe who created Ethernet famously第一期他大概是亏钱的。这就是零边际成本的例子。然后最微妙但也最重要的是网络效应这个概念,它来自计算机网络。以太网的创造者 Bob Metcalfe 著名的
1:51:55coined Metcalfe's law which is the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of nodes in the network so if network of size 10 would have a value of a hundred network of a size 100 would提出了梅特卡夫定律:一个网络的价值与网络节点数量的平方成正比。所以规模为 10 的网络价值是 100,规模为 100 的网络
1:52:07have a value of 10,000 it's not just 10x more it's a hundred X more because a square so the difference is the square so you want to be in a network effects business assuming you're not number two if you're number价值是 10,000。不只是多 10 倍,而是多 100 倍,因为是平方关系,所以差异在于平方。所以你要做有网络效应的生意——前提是你不是第二名。如果你是第
1:52:18one in network effect business you win everything so example if you look at Facebook right your friends and family social networking protocol who's your competitor nobody because they want everything through network effects which is why when people say well I一名,在有网络效应的生意里你会赢走一切。比如看 Facebook,对吧,你的朋友和家人的社交网络协议,你的竞争对手是谁?没有。因为他们靠网络效应赢走一切。所以当人们说,好吧,我
1:52:31can just switch away from Facebook they don't realize that network effects create natural monopolies they're very very powerful things and one of the dirty secrets of Silicon Valley is that a lot of the winning businesses are natural monopolies even dried随时可以离开 Facebook,他们没意识到网络效应会造出自然垄断,这是非常非常强大的东西。硅谷的一个肮脏秘密就是,很多赢家生意都是自然垄断,甚至连共享
1:52:44sharing tends towards one winner-take-all system like uber will always have better economics and lyft as long as it's moving more drivers and more writers around something like Google there's the only one Bible search engine I do like DuckDuckGo you know出行也趋向赢家通吃的系统。只要 Uber 运送的司机和乘客更多,它的经济模型就永远比 Lyft 好。像 Google,那是唯一一个主流搜索引擎——我确实喜欢 DuckDuckGo,你知道
1:52:57privacy reasons but they're just always gonna be behind because of network effects twitter right where else would you go for micro blogging even YouTube has a weak network effects but they're still powerful enough there's really no number-two site that you因为隐私原因——但他们会一直落后,因为网络效应。Twitter 呢,对吧,做微博客你还能去哪?连 YouTube 也有较弱的网络效应,但仍足够强大,你几乎找不出一个第二名的网站
1:53:09go to to consume your video on a regular basis it even turns out in detail Amazon Prime and convenience store credit cards and information creates a powerful network effect so what is the network effect let's define it precisely a network让你日常去看视频。甚至在细节层面,Amazon Prime、便利店、信用卡和信息都会造出强大的网络效应。那么什么是网络效应?我们精确地定义一下:网络
1:53:23effect is when each additional user adds value to the existing user base so your users themselves are creating some value for the existing users the classic example that I think everybody can understand is language let's say that there's a hundred效应就是每增加一个用户,都为已有的用户群增加价值,也就是你的用户本身在为已有用户创造价值。我觉得最经典、人人都能理解的例子是语言。假设有一百
1:53:39people live in the community and speak ten different languages and each person just speaks one of those ten well you're having to translate all the time it's incredibly painful but if all hundred of you spoke the same language it would个人住在一个社区里,说十种不同的语言,每个人只会说其中一种。那你就得一直翻译,痛苦得不行。但如果你们一百个人都说同一种语言,那
1:53:50add tremendous value and so the way that community will play out is ten people start out speaking ten languages let's say that one extra person limbs English well now all of a sudden eleven people know English so that the next会带来巨大的价值。这个社区会怎么演变呢:一开始十个人说十种语言,假设多来的一个人学了英语,那么突然之间就有十一个人会英语了。于是下一个
1:54:02person comes in to learn new language probably gonna choose English at some point let's say English gets a twenty or twenty-five people it's done it's just gonna own the entire language marketplace and the rest of the languages will get competed来学新语言的人,到某个时点很可能会选英语。假设英语到了二十或二十五个人,那就结束了,它会占据整个语言市场,其他语言都会被竞争
1:54:12out which is why long term the entire world is probably gonna end up speaking English in Chinese China is closed off on the internet but the Internet itself is a great leveler and people who want to communicate on the Internet掉。这就是为什么长期来看,全世界大概最后都会说英语。中国在互联网上是封闭的,但互联网本身是个巨大的拉平器,想在互联网上交流的人
1:54:23are forced to speak English because the largest community of people on the Internet speaks English I always feel bad for my colleagues who grew up speaking foreign languages in foreign countries because you don't have access to so many books so被迫说英语,因为互联网上最大的社群说英语。我一直为那些在外国长大、说外语的同事感到惋惜,因为你接触不到那么多书。很多
1:54:36many books just haven't been translated into other languages so if you only spoke French or you only spoke German or you only spoke Hindi for example you would be at a severe disadvantage in a technical education invariably if you go书根本没有被翻译成其他语言。所以如果你只会说法语,或者只会说德语,或者只会说印地语,那在技术教育上你会处于严重劣势。毫无疑问,如果你去
1:54:49and get a technical education you have to learn English just because you have to read these books that have this data that has not been translated so languages are probably the oldest example of network effect money is another example we接受技术教育,你就必须学英语,就因为你要读这些书,里面有还没被翻译的数据。所以语言大概是最古老的网络效应例子。货币是另一个例子。我们
1:55:00should all probably be using the same money except for the fact that Geographic and regulatory boundaries have created these artificial islands of money but even then the world tends to use a single currency as the reserve currency at most times大概都应该用同一种货币,只不过地理和监管边界造出了这些人为的货币孤岛。但即便这样,世界在多数时候还是倾向于用单一货币作为储备货币,
1:55:12currently the US dollar so network affects a very powerful concept when you're picking a business model it's really good idea to pick a model where you can benefit from network effects low marginal costs and scale economies and these tend to现在就是美元。所以网络效应是个非常强大的概念。你在挑商业模式时,最好挑一个能享受网络效应、低边际成本和规模经济的模式,而这些通常
1:55:27go together like anything that has zero marginal cost of production obviously has scale economies and things that have zero marginal cost every productions very often tend to have Network effects because it doesn't cost you anything more to stamp out the是相辅相成的。任何零边际生产成本的东西显然都有规模经济;而零边际生产成本的东西往往也有网络效应,因为多印一个不额外花钱,
1:55:39thing so then you can just create little hooks for users to add value to each other you should always be thinking about how your users your customers can add value to each other because that is the ultimate form of leverage于是你可以设计一些小钩子,让用户彼此为对方增加价值。你应该一直思考你的用户、你的客户如何能为彼此增加价值,因为那是最终极的 leverage 形式。
1:55:51you're in the beach of the Bahamas or you're sleeping at night and your customers are adding value to each other tweet storm is very abstract it's deliberately meant to be broadly applicable to all kinds of different domains and disciplines and你在巴哈马的海滩上,或者晚上睡觉的时候,你的客户都在为彼此增加价值。这条推文串非常抽象,它是刻意设计成广泛适用于各种不同领域、学科、
1:56:06time periods and places but sometimes it's hard to work without concrete example so let's just go concrete for a minute look at the real estate business you could start at the bottom let's say you're a day laborer you come in时代和地方的。但有时没有具体例子很难操作,所以我们具体一点。看看房地产这门生意,你可以从最底层开始。假设你是个日工,你过来
1:56:18you fix people's houses someone orders you around tells you break that piece of rock send that piece of wood put that thing over there there's all these menial jobs that go on in a construction site if you're working one of帮人修房子,有人指挥你,叫你敲开那块石头、锯那块木头、把那东西放到那边去。工地上有各种这类杂活。如果你在做其中
1:56:30those jobs unless you're a skilled trade like say a carpenter or electrician you don't really have specific knowledge and even carpenter electrician is not that specific because other people can be trained how to do it so you can be replaced某份工作,除非你是木工、电工这类技术工种,否则你其实没有 specific knowledge。而即便是木工、电工也没那么 specific,因为别人可以被培训去做,所以你随时能被替换。
1:56:41so you get paid your fifteen twenty twenty-five fifty if you're really lucky 75 dollars an hour but that's about it you don't have any leverage other than from the tools that you're using so if you're driving a bulldozer that's better所以你一小时拿十五、二十、二十五、五十,运气特别好能拿七十五美元,也就这样了。除了手上的工具,你没有任何 leverage。所以如果你开推土机,那会比
1:56:52than doing it with your hands so daily labor in India makes a lot less because they have no tool leverage you don't have much accountability you're a faceless cog and the construction crew and the owner of the house or the纯用手干要好。所以印度的日工挣得少得多,因为他们没有工具带来的 leverage。你也没什么 accountability,你只是施工队里一个没有面孔的齿轮,房子的主人或者
1:57:02buyer the house doesn't know or care that you worked on it one step up from that you might have a contractor like a general contractor who someone hires to come and fix and repair and build up their house that general买家根本不知道、也不在乎你参与过。往上一层,你可能是个承包商,比如总承包商,有人雇他来修整、翻建自己的房子。这个总
1:57:14contractor is taking accountability they're taking responsibility so now if let's say they got paid two and fifty thousand dollars for a job so I'm using barrier prices so go arrest the world price $100,000 for the job to fix up a承包商承担 accountability,承担责任。所以现在,假设他们接一个活拿到二十五万美元——我用的是湾区价格,就按世界价格说吧——翻修一栋房子收十万美元
1:57:26house and it actually cost the general contractor all said and done $70,000 well that contractors gonna pocket that remaining thirty so they got the upside they got the equity but they're also taking accountability and risk so if the project runs的活儿,而总承包商最终算下来实际成本是七万美元,那他就把剩下的三万装进兜里。所以他有上行收益,有股权,但同时他也承担 accountability 和风险。所以如果项目
1:57:39over and there's losses then they eat the losses but you see be just the accountability gives them some form of additional potential income and then they also have labor leverage because they have a bunch of people working for them but超支、出现亏损,他们就得自己吃下亏损。你看,光是 accountability 就给了他们某种额外的潜在收入;而且他们还有劳动力 leverage,因为有一群人在为他们工作。不过
1:57:50it probably tops out right there you can go one level above that and you can look at a property developer this might be someone who is a contractor who did a bunch of houses did a really good job then decided大概也就到此为止了。再往上走一层,你可以看房地产开发商。这个人可能原来是个承包商,做过一堆房子,做得非常好,然后决定
1:58:02to go into business for themselves and they go around looking for beaten down properties that have potential they buy them they either raise money from investors they're fronted themselves they fix the place up they sell it for twice what they自己出来做生意。他们四处寻找有潜力的破旧房产,买下来,要么从投资人那里募钱,要么自己出钱,把它们翻新,然后以买入价两倍的价格卖掉
1:58:14bought it for maybe they only put in 20% more so it's a healthy profit so now a developer like that takes on more accountability has more risk they're more specific knowledge because now you have to know which neighborhoods are worth——也许他们只多投了 20%,所以利润很健康。这样的开发商承担更多 accountability、更多风险,也有更多 specific knowledge,因为现在你得知道哪些街区值得
1:58:26buying in which Lots are actually good and which Lots are bad what makes or breaks a specific property you have to imagine the finished house that's gonna be there even when the property itself might look really bad right now so买,哪些地块真的好、哪些地块很糟,什么决定了一处房产的成败。你得能想象那里最终建成的那栋房子,即便这处房产现在看起来可能很糟。所以
1:58:37there's more specific knowledge there's more accountability and risk and now you also have capital leverage because you're also putting money into the project but conceivably you could buy you know a piece of land or a broken-down house for $200,000 and这里有更多 specific knowledge,更多 accountability 和风险;而现在你还有资本 leverage,因为你也往项目里投钱。可以想象,你花二十万美元买一块地或者一栋破房子,
1:58:49turn it into a million-dollar mansion and pocket all the difference one level beyond that might be a famous architect or a developer we're just having your name on a property because you've done so many great properties increases its value one把它变成百万美元的豪宅,差价全装进自己兜里。再往上一层,可能是个著名建筑师或者开发商——只要你的名字挂在一处房产上,它的价值就上升,因为你做过太多出色的项目。再
1:59:02level up from that you might be a person who decides well I understand real estate and I now know enough of the dynamics of real estate that rather than just build and flip my own properties or improve my own properties往上一层,你可能是那种人:决定——好吧,我懂房地产,我现在对房地产的运作规律了解得够多了,与其只是自己建房、翻房、或者改造自己的物业,
1:59:13I'm gonna be a massive developer I'm gonna build entire communities another person might say I like that leverage but I don't want to manage all these people I want to do it more through capital so I'm gonna start a real不如做一个大型开发商,我要建整个社区。另一个人可能会说:我喜欢那种 leverage,但我不想管这么多人,我想更多通过资本来做,所以我要开一家房
1:59:24estate investment trust and that requires specific knowledge not just about investing in real estate and building real estate but also requires specific knowledge about the financial markets and the capital markets and how real estate trusts operate one level beyond that地产投资信托(REIT)。这需要 specific knowledge,不只是关于投资房地产和建设房地产,还需要关于金融市场、资本市场以及房地产信托如何运作的 specific knowledge。再往上一层
1:59:37might be somebody who says actually I want to bring the maximum leverage to bear in this market and the maximum specific knowledge and so that person would say well I understand real estate and I understand everything from basic housing construction可能是这样的人:其实我想在这个市场里施加最大的 leverage 和最多的 specific knowledge。于是这个人会说:好,我懂房地产,从基础的住宅施工
1:59:51to building properties and selling them to how real estate markets move and thrive and I also understand the technology business so I understand how to recruit developers how to write code and how to build that product and I understand how到建房卖房,到房地产市场如何运转和繁荣,我都懂;同时我也懂技术生意,所以我懂得如何招开发人员、如何写代码、如何做出那个产品;我还懂得
2:00:03to raise money from venture capitalists and how to return it now what that works and obviously not a single person may know this you may pull a team together to do it where each have different skill sets but that combined如何从风险投资人那里募资,以及如何给他们回报。这当然不是单个人能全都懂的,你可能要把一个团队聚起来做,每个人有不同技能,但那个组合起来的
2:00:12entity would have specific knowledge in technology and in real estate it would have massive accountability because that company's name would be a very high risk high reward effort attached to the whole thing and people would devote their lives to it实体既在技术、又在房地产上有 specific knowledge;它会有巨大的 accountability,因为这家公司的名字会与一个高风险高回报的事业绑定在一起,人们会为此投入自己的一生、
2:00:25take on significant risk and then it would have leverage in code with lots of developers it would have capital with investors putting money and the founders own capital and it would have labor of some of the highest quality labor that承担重大风险;然后它在代码上有 leverage,有很多开发人员;它有资本,投资人投钱,创始人自己也投钱;它还有最高质量的劳动力——
2:00:39you can find which is high quality engineers and designers and marketers who are working on the company and then you may end up with a Trulia or a read fan or Zillow kind of company and then the upside could potentially你能找到的最好的工程师、设计师和营销人员都在为这家公司工作。最终你可能做出 Trulia、Redfin 或者 Zillow 那样的公司,那么上行空间可能
2:00:48be in the billions of dollars or the hundreds of millions of dollars so as you layer in more and more kinds of knowledge that can only be gained on the job and aren't common knowledge and you layer in more and达到数十亿美元,或者数亿美元。所以当你一层层叠加越来越多只能在实战中获得、并非常识的知识,叠加越来越多的
2:01:00more accountability and risk-taking and you layer in more and more great people working on it and more and more capital on it and more and more code and media on it you keep expanding the scope of the opportunity all theaccountability 和风险承担,叠加越来越多优秀的人参与,叠加越来越多的资本,叠加越来越多的代码和媒体,你就一直在扩大这个机会的规模,
2:01:11way from the day laborer who might just literally be scrapping on the ground with their hands all the way up to somebody who started a real estate tech company and then took it public we spoke about specific knowledge we talked从那个真的趴在地上用手干活的日工,一直到那个创办了房地产科技公司、还把它做上市的人。我们讲过了 specific knowledge,讲过了
2:01:24about accountability we talked about leverage the last skill that navall talks about in his tweet storm is judgment where he says that leverage is a force multiplier for your judgment we are now living in an age of nearly infinite leverageaccountability,讲过了 leverage。Naval 在他那条推文串里讲的最后一个技能是 judgment(判断力)。他说 leverage 是你判断力的力量倍增器。我们现在生活在一个 leverage 几乎无限的时代,
2:01:41and all the great fortunes are created through leverage so your first job is to go and obtain leverage and you can obtain leverage through permission by taking risks and getting people to work for you or by raising capital or you所有巨大的财富都是通过 leverage 创造的。所以你的第一份工作是去获得 leverage。你可以通过需要许可的方式获得 leverage:承担风险、让别人为你工作,或者募集资本;你也
2:01:53can get leverage permissionless lee by learning how to code or becoming good communicator and podcasting and broadcasting creating videos writing etc so that's how you get leverage but once you have leverage what do you do with it well the first可以以无需许可的方式获得 leverage:学会写代码,或者成为一个好的沟通者,做播客、做广播、做视频、写作等等。这就是获得 leverage 的方式。但一旦你有了 leverage,你拿它做什么?首先
2:02:06part a career spent hustling to get leverage once you have the leverage then you want to slow down a bit because your judgment really matters it's like you've gone from steering your sailboat around to now you're steering an ocean liner你职业生涯的一部分是用来拼命争取 leverage 的。一旦你有了 leverage,你就想稍微放慢一点,因为你的判断力真的很重要。这就像你原本在摆弄自己的帆船,现在你在驾驶一艘远洋邮轮
2:02:18or a tanker you have a lot more at risk but you have a lot more to gain as well you're carrying a much higher payload so in an age of infinite leverage judgment becomes the most important skill Warren Buffett is或者油轮。你承担的风险大得多,但能获得的也多得多,你承载的载荷要大得多。所以在 leverage 无限的时代,判断力成了最重要的技能。Warren Buffett 现在
2:02:29so wealthy now because of his judgment even if you were to take away all of Warren's money tomorrow investors would come out of the woodwork and hand him 100 billion dollars because they know his judgment is so good they would这么富有,就是因为他的判断力。就算你明天把 Warren 所有的钱都拿走,投资人也会从各个角落冒出来,把一千亿美元交到他手上,因为他们知道他的判断力太好了。他们愿意
2:02:40give him a big chunk of that hundred billion dollars to invest so ultimately everything else that you do is actually setting you up to apply your judgment one of the big things that people rail on a CEO pay and for把那一千亿美元的一大部分交给他去投资。所以归根到底,你做的其他一切,其实都是在为运用你的判断力做准备。人们猛烈抨击的一件事就是 CEO 的薪酬,
2:02:52sure there's crony capitalism that goes on where these CEOs control their boards and the boards give them too much money but there are certain CEOs who definitely earn their keep because their judgment is better if you're steering a big ship当然确实存在裙带资本主义,这些 CEO 控制董事会,董事会给他们太多钱。但有些 CEO 绝对是物有所值的,因为他们的判断力更好。如果你在驾驶一艘大船,
2:03:03if you're steering Google or Apple and your judgment is 10 or 20 percent better than the next person's Society will literally pay you hundreds of millions of dollars more because you're steering a hundred billion dollar ship if you're on course如果你在驾驶 Google 或 Apple,而你的判断力比下一个人好 10% 或 20%,社会真的会多付你几亿美元,因为你在驾驶一艘千亿美元的大船。如果你在航向上
2:03:17ten or twenty percent of the time more often the other person the compounding results on that hundreds of billions of dollars you're managing will be so large that your CEO pay will be dwarfed in comparison so demonstrated judgment credibility around比另一个人多对 10% 或 20% 的时间,你所管理的这数千亿美元产生的复利结果会大到让你的 CEO 薪酬显得微不足道。所以已被证明的判断力、围绕它的可信度
2:03:29the judgment is so critical Warren Buffett wins here because he has massive credibility he's been highly accountable he's been right over and over in the public domain he's built a reputation for very high integrity so you can trust him so——判断力如此关键。Warren Buffett 在这里胜出,因为他有巨大的可信度:他极度 accountable,他在公众视野里一次又一次地判断正确,他建立了极高诚信的声誉,所以你可以信任他。
2:03:45a person like that people will throw infinite leverage behind him because of his judgment nobody asked him how hard he works nobody asked him when he wakes up or when he goes to sleep did like Warren just do your thing像这样的人,人们会因为他的判断力而把无限的 leverage 押在他身上。没人问他工作有多努力,没人问他几点起床、几点睡觉。就像对 Warren 说的:你就干你的吧。
2:03:56so especially demonstrated judgment with high accountability clear track record is critical let's define judgment I would define it as knowing the long-term effects of your decisions or being able to predict the long-term affects your decisions it's funny my definition of所以,尤其是已被证明的判断力,加上高度的 accountability 和清晰的过往记录,至关重要。我们来定义一下判断力。我会把它定义为:知道你的决策的长期影响,或者能够预测你的决策的长期影响。有意思的是,我对
2:04:17wisdom is knowing the long-term consequences of your actions they're not all that different wisdom is just judgment on a personal domain wisdom applied to external problems I think is judgment so they're they're highly linked but yes it's knowing the long-term智慧的定义是:知道你的行为的长期后果。两者差别并不大。智慧只是个人领域里的判断力;把智慧应用到外部问题上,我认为就是判断力。所以它们高度相关。但没错,就是知道长期的
2:04:30consequences of your actions and then making kind of the right decision to capitalize on that judgment is very hard to build up this is where both intellect and experience come into play there are many problems with the intellectuals in the后果,然后做出某种正确的决定去利用它。判断力很难建立,这里是智力和经验同时起作用的地方。象牙塔里的知识分子有很多问题,
2:04:45ivory tower but one of the reasons why I must seem tell them rails against them is because they have no skin in the game they have no real-world experience right so they just apply purely into and intellect without any experience而 Nassim Taleb 猛烈抨击他们的一个原因,就是他们没有 skin in the game(不承担后果),他们没有真实世界的经验。所以他们只运用纯粹的智力和理解,没有任何经验,
2:04:54is often worse than useless because you get the confidence that the intellect gives you and you get some of the credibility but because you had no skin in the game and you had no real experience and no real accountability you're这往往比无用还糟,因为智力给了你自信,你也获得了一些可信度,但因为你没有 skin in the game,没有真实经验,没有真正的 accountability,你就
2:05:05just throwing darts the real world is always far far more complex than we can intellectualize and especially all the interesting fast-moving edge domains and problems you can't get there without experience so if you are smart and you iterate fast it's只是在扔飞镖。真实世界永远远比我们能理性化的复杂得多,尤其是所有有趣的、快速变化的边缘领域和问题,没有经验你根本到不了那里。所以如果你聪明、迭代快,
2:05:20not even you put 10,000 hours into something but you take 10,000 tries at something if you are smart and you have a lot of quick iterations and you try to keep your emotions out of it the people with the best甚至不需要在一件事上投入一万小时,而是在一件事上尝试一万次。如果你聪明、能大量快速迭代,并尽量把情绪排除在外——判断力最好的人
2:05:31judgement are actually among the least emotional a lot of the best investors are considered almost robotic in that regard but I would be surprised if even the best entrepreneurs often come across as unemotional there is this archetype of the passionate其实是最不情绪化的一批人。很多最好的投资人在这一点上几乎被认为是机器人。但我一点也不意外,即便最好的创业者,也常常给人不带感情的印象。有一种
2:05:45entrepreneur and yeah they have to care about what they're doing but they also have to see very clearly what's actually happening and the thing that prevents you from seeing what's actually happening or your emotions our emotions are constantly clouding our“激情创业者”的典型形象。是的,他们必须在乎自己在做的事,但他们也必须非常清楚地看到实际正在发生什么。而妨碍你看到实际正在发生的事的,就是你的情绪——我们的情绪一直在蒙蔽我们的
2:05:57judgment and investing or in running companies or in building products or being entrepreneur emotions really get in the way emotions that were preventing you from seeing what's actually happening until you can no longer resist the truth of what's happening until判断力。无论是投资、经营公司、做产品还是做创业者,情绪真的会挡路。情绪阻止你看到实际正在发生的事,直到你再也无法抗拒事情的真相,直到
2:06:11it becomes too sudden and then you're forced into suffering which is a breaking of this emotional fantasy that you would put together to try and connect some of these concepts I would say that first you're accountable for your judgement judgment它变得太突然,然后你被迫承受痛苦——那其实就是你拼凑起来的那个情绪幻想破灭的过程。为了把其中一些概念串起来,我想说:首先,你要对你的判断力负责;判断力
2:06:26is the exercise of wisdom comes from experience and that experience can be accelerated through short iterations and the reason why a lot of the top investors a lot of the value investors if you read Jeremy Grantham where you read Warren是智慧的运用,来自经验,而经验可以通过短周期迭代来加速。这就是为什么很多顶尖投资人、很多价值投资人——如果你读 Jeremy Grantham,或者读 Warren
2:06:44Buffett you know you read up on Michael burry these people sound like philosophers or they are philosophers or they're reading a lot of history books or science books like what are they doing shouldn't they be reading investment books no investmentBuffett,或者研究 Michael Burry——这些人听起来像哲学家,或者他们本身就是哲学家;他们读大量历史书或科学书。他们在干什么?他们不该读投资书吗?不,投资
2:06:55books or the worst place to learn about investment because investment is a real-world activity that is highly multivariate all the advantages are always being competed away it's always in the cutting edge what you actually just need is very very broad-based书是学习投资最糟糕的地方,因为投资是一种真实世界的活动,高度多变量,所有优势都在被竞争消磨掉,永远处在最前沿。你真正需要的只是非常非常广博的
2:07:08judgment and thinking and the best way to do that is to study everything including a lot of philosophy and philosophy also makes you more stoic makes you less emotional and so you make better decisions you have better judgment one simple判断力和思考能力,而最好的方式是什么都学,包括大量哲学。哲学还能让你更坚忍、更少情绪化,于是你做出更好的决策,拥有更好的判断力。一个简单的
2:07:21thing is I see that go ahead on Twitter and it seems like half of Twitter is outrageous something at all times you can go within someone's Twitter feed and get at least some semblance of what it must be like to观察是:我在 Twitter 上看到——你继续——Twitter 上一半的人任何时候都在对什么事愤怒。你可以翻看某个人的 Twitter 时间线,至少能大致感受到
2:07:31be in their head all the time and the more outrage somebody is I guarantee you the worse their judgment is if someone's constantly tweeting political outrage and it seems like an angry person getting into fights you don't want to hand一直待在他脑子里是什么感觉。我向你保证,一个人越爱愤怒,他的判断力就越差。如果某人不停地发政治愤怒推文,看起来像个到处吵架的愤怒之人,你不会想把
2:07:44these person the keys to your car let alone the keys to your company so we covered the skills that you need to get rich that was specific knowledge accountability leverage judgment and lifelong learning let's talk a little bit about the你的车钥匙交给这种人,更别说把公司的钥匙交给他。好,我们讲了致富所需的技能:specific knowledge、accountability、leverage、判断力,以及终身学习。我们再聊聊
2:08:02importance of working hard and valuing your time so no one is going to value you more than you value yourself so you just have to set a very high personal hourly rate and you have to stick to it so even努力工作以及重视自己时间的重要性。没有人会比你自己更看重你,所以你必须给自己设定一个非常高的小时费率,并且坚持它。所以即便
2:08:16since when I was young I just decided that I was worth a lot more than the market thought I was worth but I started treating myself that way so always factor your time into every decision how much time does it从年轻时起,我就认定我自己的价值远高于市场认为的价值,然后我开始那样对待自己。所以永远要把时间计入每一个决策:这要花多少时间?
2:08:26take oh it's gonna take me an hour to get across town to get this thing well I value myself at $100 an hour that's throwing hundred dollars out of my pocket am I gonna do that you buy something from Amazon哦,穿过整个城去拿这个东西要花我一小时。我给自己估值每小时一百美元,那就是从口袋里扔掉一百块。我会去做吗?你在 Amazon 买了东西,
2:08:36they screwed it up you have to return it is it worth your time to return it is it worth the mental hassle keep in mind that you have less work hours you have less mentally high-output hours do you want to他们搞砸了,你得退回去。退货值得你花这时间吗?值得这份心力折腾吗?记住,你的工作时间更少,你精神高产出的时间更少。你是想
2:08:48use them to run errands and solve little problems or do you want to save them for the big stuff all the great scientists were terrible at managing their household life none of them had a clean organized room or you know把这些时间用来跑腿、解决小问题,还是想把它们留给大事?所有伟大的科学家都不擅长打理家庭生活,没有一个人有干净整齐的房间,或者你知道,
2:08:58made all their social events on time or sent their thank-you cards you can spend your life however you want but if you want to get rich it has to be your number one overwhelming desire which means that it has to准时出席所有社交活动,或者寄出感谢卡。你可以随心所欲地度过一生,但如果你想致富,它必须成为你第一位、压倒一切的渴望,这意味着它必须
2:09:08come before anything else which means you can't be penny-pinching this is what people understand you can penny pinch your way to the basic sustenance you can keep your expenses low maybe retire early and not spend too that's perfectly valid but排在一切之前。这意味着你不能小气抠门。这就是人们理解的那套:你可以靠精打细算维持基本生计,把开支压低,也许早点退休、少花钱,那完全合理。但
2:09:21we're here to talk about wealth creation and if you're gonna do that then that has to be your number one overwhelming priority so fast-forward to your wealthy self and pick some intermediate hourly rate for me believe it or not back我们这里谈的是财富创造,如果你要做这件事,那它就必须是你第一位、压倒一切的优先事项。所以快进到你已经富有的自己,然后选一个中间的小时费率。对我来说,信不信由你,
2:09:32when you could have hired me which now obviously can't but back when you could have hired me and this was true a decade ago or even two decades ago before I had any real money my hourly rate I used to回到你还能雇得起我的时候——现在显然不行了——但回到你还能雇我的时候,这在十年前甚至二十年前、在我还没有什么真正的钱的时候就是如此:我给自己定的时薪,我
2:09:42say to myself over and over is $5,000 an hour today and when I look back really it was about $1,000 an hour and of course I still ended up doing stupid things like arguing with the electrician or returning the broken一遍又一遍对自己说的,是今天每小时五千美元。现在回头看,其实大约是每小时一千美元。当然我还是会干蠢事,比如跟电工争论,或者去退那个坏掉的
2:09:53speaker but I shouldn't have and I did a lot less than any of my friends would and I would make a theatrical show out of throwing something in the trash pile or giving to Salvation Army rather than trying to return音箱——但我本不该这样。我在这类事上比我任何朋友都少做得多。我会很戏剧化地把东西扔进垃圾堆,或者捐给救世军,而不是去退货,
2:10:03it or handing something to people rather than trying to fix it I would argue with my girlfriends and even today to my wife like I don't do that that's not a problem that I solve I still argued that with my或者把东西直接给人,而不是去修。我会跟女朋友争论——甚至今天跟妻子也是——我说我不干这个,这不是我要解决的问题。我到现在还会跟我
2:10:12mother when she hands me like little to do's I just don't do that I would rather hire you an assistant and this was true even when I didn't have money another way of thinking about something is if you can outsource妈争这个:她递给我一堆小事让我做,我就是不做,我宁愿给你雇个助理。这在我没钱的时候就已经如此了。另一种思考方式是:如果某件事可以外包,
2:10:22something or not do something for less than your hourly rate outsource it or don't do it so if you can hire someone to do it for less than your hourly rate hire them that even includes things like cooking now if或者不做某件事的代价低于你的时薪,那就外包,或者干脆不做。所以如果你能雇人来做,花费低于你的时薪,那就雇人。这甚至包括做饭这类事。
2:10:31you may want to eat your healthy home-cooked meals but if you can outsource it do that instead and I know some people will say well what about the joy of life and what about getting it right just your way sure你可能想吃自己做的健康家常菜,但如果能外包,那就外包。我知道有人会说:那生活的乐趣呢?那按自己的方式做到位呢?当然,
2:10:40you can do that but you're not gonna be wealthy because now you've made something else a priority Paul Graham said it pretty well for Y Combinator startups you said you should be working on your product and getting product market fit你可以那样做,但你不会富有,因为你现在把别的东西放在了优先位置。Paul Graham 说得挺好,对 Y Combinator 的创业公司,他说你应该专注于你的产品、做出 product market fit,
2:10:50and you should be exercising and eating healthy like that's about it that's kind of all you have time for while you're on this mission so set a very high hourly aspirational rate for yourself and stick to it and it should还要锻炼、吃得健康,大概就这些。在执行这个使命期间,你大概就只有这些时间。所以给自己设定一个非常高的、带理想色彩的小时费率,并坚持它,它应该
2:11:00seem and feel absurdly high if it doesn't it's not high enough and whatever you picked on my advice to you would be raise it like I said for myself even before I had money for the longest time I use five看起来、感觉起来高得离谱。如果没这种感觉,那就是还不够高。不管你选了什么,我给你的建议是:再往上调。就像我说的,我自己在有钱之前,很长一段时间用的是五
2:11:11thousand dollars an hour and if you extrapolate that out into what it looks like his annual salary its multiple millions of dollars per year ironically I actually think I've beaten it but I look back because I'm not the hardest-working person千美元一小时。如果你把它外推成年薪,那是每年好几百万美元。讽刺的是,我其实觉得自己超过了这个数,但回头看,因为我并不是最勤奋的人——
2:11:21I'm actually kind of a lazy person so I worked through bursts of energy where I'm really motivated with something so if I actually look at how much I've earned per actual hour that I put in is probably quite a bit我其实有点懒,所以我是靠一阵阵的能量爆发来工作的,那种对某件事特别有动力的状态。所以如果我真的去算我每实际投入一小时赚了多少,大概要
2:11:30higher than that let's talk about hard work there's this battle that happens in Twitter a lot between should you work hard and should you not like David Hauser's on there saying it's like your slave driving people and Keith Robo is高不少。我们聊聊努力工作。Twitter 上经常有一场争论:到底该不该拼命工作。比如 David Heinemeier Hansson 在那儿说这像是在奴役别人,而 Keith Rabois
2:11:41always on there saying like know all the great founders work their fingers to the bone and they're talking past each other first of all they're talking about two different things David is talking about employees in a lifestyle business which is总在那儿说:不,所有伟大的创始人都拼到手指磨破。他们其实是在各说各话。首先,他们谈的是两件不同的事。David 谈的是生活方式型生意里的员工,那
2:11:51fine your number one thing in life if you're doing that is not getting wealthy you have a job you also have your family you also have your life but Keith is talking about the Olympics of startups he's talking about the没问题——如果你做那种生意,你人生中第一位的就不是致富,你有一份工作,你还有家庭,你还有你的生活。但 Keith 谈的是创业界的奥运会,他谈的是
2:12:01person going for the gold medal and trying to build a multi-billion dollar public company that person has to get everything right they have to have great judgment they have to pick the right thing to work on they have to recruit那个冲金牌、想打造一家数十亿美元上市公司的人。那个人必须每一件事都做对:必须有出色的判断力,必须选对要做的事,必须招到
2:12:11the right team and they have to work crazy hard because they're basically engaged in a competitive sprint so if getting wealthy is your goal you are going to have to work as hard as you can but hard work is absolutely对的团队,而且必须玩命工作,因为他们基本上是在进行一场竞争性的冲刺。所以如果致富是你的目标,你就必须尽力去拼。但努力工作绝对
2:12:23no substitute for who you work with and what you work on what you work on is probably the most important thing finding product market founder fit to expand on Marc Andreessen definition he came with product market fit but I would不能替代“和谁一起工作”以及“做什么”。你做什么,大概是最重要的事。要找到 product market founder fit(产品、市场、创始人三者契合)。扩展 Marc Andreessen 的定义,他提出的是 product market fit,而我会
2:12:36add product market founder fit which is how well you are personally suited to that business the combination that three that should be your overwhelming goal and you can save yourself a lot of time if you pick the right area to加上 founder:product market founder fit,也就是你个人与那门生意有多契合。这三者的结合应该是你压倒一切的目标。如果你选对了领域,你能省下大量时间;
2:12:48work in picking the right people to work with is the next most important piece and then third comes how hard you work but they're like three legs of a stool if you shortchange in any one of them the whole stool选对一起工作的人是第二重要的一块;第三才是你工作有多努力。它们就像凳子的三条腿,任何一条偷工减料,整张凳子
2:12:58is gonna fall down so it's not like you can pick one over the other that easily so the order operations when you're building a business is or even building your career is first figure out what should I be doing what都会倒。所以并不是你能轻易地只取其一。所以当你创业、甚至构建职业生涯时,操作顺序是:第一,想清楚我应该做什么——
2:13:10is something where there is a market that is emerging there's a product that I can build that I'm excited to work on and something where I have specific knowledge and I'm really into it and then second surround yourself with the什么是那个正在兴起的市场里有需求、我能做出让自己兴奋的产品、并且我有 specific knowledge、真的非常投入的事。第二,让自己身边围绕着
2:13:20best people possible and no matter how high your bar is raise your bar because you can never be working with other people who are great enough if there's someone greater out there to work with you should go work with them尽可能最好的人。不管你的标准多高,都要再提高,因为和你共事的人永远不够优秀。如果外面有更优秀的人可以合作,你就该去和他们合作。
2:13:30I advise a lot of people who are looking at which started to join in Silicon Valley I say basically pick the one that's going to have the best alumni network for you in the future look at the PayPal mafia they很多人来问我该加入硅谷的哪家创业公司,我给他们的建议基本上是:选那个未来能给你最好“校友网络”的。看看 PayPal 黑帮,他们
2:13:40work with a bunch of geniuses so they all got rich so just try and pick based on the highest intelligence energy and integrity people that you can find and then finally once you have picked the right thing to work on和一群天才共事,所以他们都富了。所以就按你能找到的智力、能量和正直程度最高的人来选。最后,一旦你选对了要做的事、
2:13:51and the right people to work with then you work as hard as you can this is where the mythology gets a little crazy people will work 1820 hour weeks a lot of that's just status signaling it's showing off nobody really选对了共事的人,那就尽全力去工作。神话在这里就有点离谱了——有人会一周工作 80、100、120 小时,其中很多只是地位信号,是在炫耀。没有人真的能
2:14:03works 80 200 20 hours a week sustained at high output with mental clarity your brain breaks down you just won't have good ideas so really the way people tend to work most effectively especially in knowledge work is they sprint as一周持续 80、100、120 小时还能保持高产出和头脑清晰——你的大脑会崩溃,你就是不会有好点子。所以人们真正最高效的工作方式,尤其在知识工作里,是尽全力冲刺
2:14:18hard as they can while they're working on something and they're inspired and they're passionate and then they rest to take long breaks it's more like a lion hunting and much less like a marathon running and running so you sprint then——在工作某件事、有灵感、有热情的时候——然后休息,长时间休息。这更像狮子捕猎,而不像跑马拉松。所以你冲刺,
2:14:29you rest you reassess and then you try again in which you end up doing is you end up building a marathon of Sprint's maybe just made the point to me on the side that inspiration is perishable which is a very然后休息,重新评估,然后再试一次。最终你做出来的,是一场由冲刺组成的马拉松。Nivi 刚在旁边跟我提了一句:灵感是易腐的,这是个非常
2:14:39good point when you have your inspiration do it right then and there this happens to me a lot with my tweet storms I've actually come up with a whole bunch of additional tweets Donna decides the ones that are already out好的观点。当你有灵感时,就当场去做。我写推文串时经常这样:我其实想出过一大堆额外的推文,最终还是决定只保留已经发出去的那些。
2:14:48there but sometimes I just hesitate or I just pause and then it just dies and what I've learned is if I'm inspired to write a blog post or to publish a tweet storm I should probably do it right away otherwise但有时候我就是犹豫了一下,或者停了一下,然后它就死了。我学到的是:如果我有灵感写一篇博客或者发一条推文串,我大概应该立刻去做,否则
2:14:58it's not gonna get out there I won't come back to it so inspiration is a beautiful and powerful thing and when you have it just seize it so people talk about impatience when do you know to be impatient when you它就不会面世,我也不会再回来写它。所以灵感是美好而强大的东西,当你有它时就抓住它。人们会谈到“不耐烦”:你怎么知道什么时候该不耐烦、
2:15:09know to be patient my glib tweet on this was impatience with actions and patience with the results and I think that's actually a good philosophy for life anything you have to do just get it why wait you're not getting any什么时候该有耐心?我对此有一条随口而出的推文:对行动要不耐烦,对结果要有耐心。我觉得这其实是很好的人生哲学。任何你必须做的事,就赶紧去做,为什么要等?你不会变得
2:15:21younger your life is slipping away you don't want to spend it waiting in line you don't want to spend it traveling back and forth you don't want to spend it doing things that you know ultimately aren't part of your mission更年轻,你的生命正在流逝。你不想把生命花在排队上,不想花在来回奔波上,不想花在那些你知道最终不属于你使命的事情上。
2:15:31and when you do them you want to do them as quickly as you can while you do them well with your full attention but then you just have to give up on the results you have to be patient with the而当你做这些事时,你要尽可能快,同时全心投入把它们做好。但之后你就必须放下对结果的执着,你必须对结果有耐心,
2:15:41results because you deal with complex systems you didn't with lots of people it takes a long time for markets to adopt products it takes time for people to get comfortable working with each other it takes time for great products to因为你要面对复杂的系统、要和很多人打交道。市场采纳产品需要很长时间,人们彼此磨合到舒服需要时间,伟大的产品也需要时间
2:15:51emerge as you polish away polish away polish away so impatience with actions patience with results and as may be said inspiration is perishable so when you have inspiration act on it right then and there if I have a problem that才浮现出来,你要一遍遍打磨、打磨、再打磨。所以:对行动不耐烦,对结果有耐心。还有 Nivi 说的,灵感是易腐的,所以当你有灵感时,当场就行动。如果我有一个问题
2:16:04I discovered one of my businesses that needs to be solved I won't sleep until at least the resolution is in motion and this is just a personal failing but if I'm on the board of a company I'll call the CEO——在我某家公司里发现了某个必须解决的问题——我睡不着,直到至少解决方案开始推进。这算是我的个人缺陷。如果我是一家公司的董事,我会打电话给 CEO;
2:16:14if I'm running the company I'll call my reports if I'm responsible I'll get on there right then and there and solve it if I don't solve a problem the moment it happens or I don't start moving toward solving from when如果我经营这家公司,我会打电话给我的下属;如果这是我的责任,我会当场就上手解决。如果问题发生的那一刻我没有解决它,或者没有从那一刻起开始着手解决,
2:16:25it happens I have no peace I have no rest I have no happiness until that problem is solved so solve it as quickly as possible I literally won't sleep until it's solve maybe that's a personal characteristic but it's worked out我就没有安宁,没有休息,没有快乐,直到那个问题被解决。所以尽可能快地解决它。我真的会睡不着,直到它被解决。也许这只是个人特质,但在生意上它效果很好。
2:16:37well in business we squander our time with a death of a thousand cuts so another tweet ahead was you should be too busy to do coffee while still keeping an uncluttered calendar people who know me know that I'm famous for我们是用千刀万剐的方式浪费自己的时间。所以另一条推文是:你应该忙到没时间喝咖啡,同时还要保持一份清爽的日程表。认识我的人都知道我出了名的
2:16:49simultaneously doing two things one is having a very clean calendar I have almost no meetings on it and there are people that I meet with when they see my calendar they almost weep well at the same time I am busy同时做两件事:一是有一份非常干净的日程表,上面几乎没有会议,有些跟我见面的人看到我的日程表几乎要哭出来;与此同时,我一直很忙,
2:16:59all the time I'm always doing something and it's usually quote unquote work-related but it is whatever the highest impact thing is that needs to be done at that time and that I'm most interested inspired about but the only way to我总是在做点什么,通常是所谓“与工作相关”的,但其实是那个时刻需要做、影响最大、而我又最感兴趣、最有灵感的事。而做到这一点的唯一方式,
2:17:11do that is to constantly ruthlessly decline meetings people want to do coffee and build relationships and that's fine early in your career when you're still exploring but later in your career were exploiting and there are more things coming at you就是不断地、无情地拒绝会议。人们想喝咖啡、建立关系,这在你职业生涯早期还在探索的时候没问题。但到了职业生涯后期,我们是在做深度经营,有更多事情涌向你
2:17:24and you have time for you have to ruthlessly cut meetings out of your life if someone wants to do a meeting see if you can do it with a phone call instead if they want to do a phone call see而你没有那么多时间。你必须无情地把会议从生活里砍掉。如果某人想开会,看看能不能改成一个电话;如果他们想通电话,看看
2:17:32if they can do it with an email instead if they want to do it email see if they can do it a text message instead if their text messaging you should probably be ignoring most text messages unless they're true emergencies能不能改成一封邮件;如果他们要发邮件,看看能不能改成一条短信;如果他们是发短信,你大概应该忽略大部分短信,除非是真正的紧急情况。
2:17:40so one has to be utterly ruthless about dodging meetings when you do do meetings do walking meetings do standing meetings keep them short keep them actionable keep them small any meeting with eight people and it's sitting on a conference table所以人必须极其无情地躲避会议。当你确实要开会时,开走路会议、开站立会议,保持简短、保持可执行、保持小规模。任何八个人坐在会议桌旁的会议,
2:17:54nothing is getting done in that you're literally just dying one hour at a time doing coffee reminds me of an old quote I think from Steve Jobs when they asked him hey why does an apple come to conventions or why在那里面什么也完不成,你实际上是在一小时一小时地死去。说到喝咖啡,我想起一句老话,我记得是 Steve Jobs 说的。当时有人问他:嘿,为什么 Apple 不参加展会,或者为什么
2:18:07don't you come to my convention and his response was well then because we wouldn't be here working yeah I used to have a tough time turning people down for meetings but now I just tell them outright I just say look你不来我的大会?他的回答是:那样的话,我们就不会在这里工作了。是啊,我以前很难拒绝别人的会议邀约,但现在我直接跟他们说,我就说:你看,
2:18:19I don't do non-transactional meetings I don't do meetings without a strict agenda I don't do meetings unless we absolutely have to maybe used to do this he would email people when they would ask maybe and I for a meeting like我不做没有实质交易的会议,我不做没有严格议程的会议,除非绝对必要,否则我不开会。Naval 以前就是这么做的,当有人问能不能见面时,他会发邮件,比如
2:18:28coffee meeting it to know you he would say we don't do meetings unless is life and death urgent and then that person has to respond yeah its life in that origin or there's no meeting when you have something important or喝个咖啡认识一下,他会说:除非生死攸关的紧急情况,我们不开会。然后对方就必须回答:是的,这是生死攸关的。否则就没有会议。当你有重要的事、
2:18:40something valuable other busy interesting people will meet with you your calling card has to be hey here's what I'm done here's what I can show you let's meet and I'll be respectful of your time if this is useful to you有价值的事,其他忙碌而有趣的人就会见你。你的“名片”必须是:嘿,这是我做成的事,这是我能给你看的东西,我们见一面吧,我会尊重你的时间,如果这对你有用的话。
2:18:53and I find that there are very busy important people who will take your meeting but you have to come with a proper calling card all the people who tweet and who email famous or rich people saying hey if I could我发现确实有非常忙碌、非常重要的人愿意跟你见面,但你必须带着像样的“名片”来。所有那些在 Twitter 上@人、或者给名人富人发邮件说“嘿,如果我能
2:19:04just get one meeting with you and they're vague about it they're not gonna get anywhere in life you have to build up the credibility when for example an investor in the tech business in the venture business looks at a start-up跟你见上一面”、而且说得很含糊的人,他们的人生不会有什么进展。你必须建立起可信度。比如一个科技、风投行业的投资人看一家创业公司时,
2:19:16the first thing they want to see is they want to see some evidence of product progress they don't just want to even see a slide back they want to see product progress because the product progress is the resume for the他们想看到的第一样东西,就是产品进展的证据。他们甚至不想只看一份幻灯片,他们想看产品进展,因为产品进展就是创业者的简历,
2:19:26entrepreneur it is the unshakable unfaithful resume so you have to do the work to use a crypto analogy you have to have proof of work if you have proof of work and you truly have something then you shouldn't hesitate to是一份不可动摇、无法造假的简历。所以你必须去做事。用加密货币的比喻来说,你必须有 proof of work(工作量证明)。如果你有 proof of work,你真的有东西,那你就不该犹豫
2:19:39put it together in an email and send it to somebody but even then when you're asking for a meeting you want to be super actionable about it but I would say even the other side even if you yourself haven't made把它整理进一封邮件发出去。但即便那样,当你在请求一次会议时,也要非常具体、可操作。不过我也想说另一面:即便你自己还没有
2:19:48it yet if you think you're gonna make it by going out and networking and doing a whole bunch of meetings you're probably incorrect yes the networking can be important early in your career and yes you can get serendipitous with meetings成功,如果你以为自己靠出去社交、参加一堆会议就能成功,那你大概想错了。是的,社交在职业早期可能重要;是的,会议上可能碰巧有奇遇;
2:20:00but the odds are pretty low and as we spent time talking about earlier when you are just meeting people and hoping to get that lucky break you're relying on type 1 luck which is blind luck and type 2 luck which但概率相当低。正如我们前面花时间讨论过的,当你只是见人、希望撞上那个幸运机会时,你依赖的是第一种运气,即盲目的运气,以及第二种运气,
2:20:13is hustle luck but what you're not getting is type 3 or type 4 luck which are the better kinds where you spend time developing a reputation working on something developing a unique point of view and being able to spot opportunities即拼搏的运气。但你没有得到的是第三种和第四种运气——那才是更好的运气:你花时间建立声誉、深耕某件事、形成独特的视角,并且能够发现
2:20:25that others can a busy and a busy mind will destroy your ability to do great things in this world if you want to be able to do great things whether you're a musician or whether you are a entrepreneur or whether别人发现不了的机会。一颗忙碌的心、一个忙乱的头脑,会毁掉你在这个世界上做成伟大事情的能力。如果你想做成伟大的事,无论你是音乐家、创业者,还是
2:20:38you're an investor you need free time and you need a free mind we just finished talking about the importance of working hard and valuing your time next there's a few tweets on the topic of working for the long term the投资人,你都需要自由的时间,也需要自由的头脑。我们刚谈完努力工作和重视时间的重要性。接下来有几条关于“为长期而工作”的推文。
2:20:53first tweet is become the best in the world of what you do keep redefining what you do until this is true if you really want to get paid in this world you want to be number one at whatever it is第一条推文是:成为你所在领域的世界第一。不断重新定义你在做的事,直到这一点成真。如果你真的想在这个世界上赚到钱,你就想成为你所做之事的第
2:21:05that you're doing and it can be niche that's the point it can literally be you're getting paid for just being you you know at this point some of the more successful people in the world are that way Oprah gets paid一名。它可以是小众的——这就是重点。它甚至可以就是你仅仅因为“做你自己”而获得报酬。你知道,现在世界上一些更成功的人就是这样。Oprah 拿钱
2:21:14for being Oprah Joe Rogan gets paid for being Joe Rogan and they're being authentic to themselves so what this tweet is trying to say simultaneously is that you want to be number one but you want to keep changing what you就是因为她是 Oprah,Joe Rogan 拿钱就是因为他是 Joe Rogan,他们都对自己真实。所以这条推文同时想说的是:你想成为第一名,但你要不断改变你
2:21:27do until you're number one you can't just pick something arbitrary you can't say I'm gonna be the fastest runner in the world and now you got to beat the same volt that's too hard of a problem but what you can做的事,直到你成为第一名。你不能随便挑一件事,不能说我就要做世界上跑得最快的人——然后你得去打败 Usain Bolt,那问题太难了。但你可以
2:21:37do is you can keep changing what your objective is until it arrives to your specific knowledge your skill sets your position your capabilities your location your interests and then converges to making you number one so when you're searching for what做的是:不断改变你的目标,直到它落在你的 specific knowledge、你的技能组合、你的位置、你的能力、你的所在地、你的兴趣之上,然后收敛到让你成为第一名。所以当你在寻找
2:21:51to do you actually have two different foci that you have to keep in mind at all points and one of those is I want to be the best at what I do and the second is what I do is flexible该做什么时,你其实有两个不同焦点必须始终记在心里:一个是我要成为我所做之事中最好的;第二个是我做的事是灵活的,
2:22:03so that I am the best at it until you arrive at a comfortable place we were like yes this is something I can be amazing at while still being authentic to who I am and this is not going to be好让我能成为其中最好的,直到你到达一个舒服的位置,就像:对,这就是我能做到出色、同时又忠于我是谁的事。而这不会是
2:22:13an overnight discovery it's gonna be a long journey but at least you know how to think about it the most important thing for a company is to find product market fit I would say the most important thing for an entrepreneur一夜之间的发现,它会是一段漫长的旅程。但至少你知道该怎么思考它。对一家公司来说,最重要的是找到 product market fit;我会说,对一个创业者来说,最重要的是
2:22:23is to find founder product market fit where you are naturally inclined to build the right product which has a market and that's a three focus problem which is you got to make all three of those work at once if you找到 founder product market fit,也就是你天生就倾向于做出那个有市场的正确产品。这是一个三焦点问题,你必须让这三者同时成立。如果
2:22:35want to be successful in life you just have to get comfortable managing multivariate problems multiple objective functions that and this is one of those cases where you have to map at least two or three at once this reminds me of你想在人生中成功,你就必须习惯处理多变量问题、多个目标函数。而这正是那种你必须同时处理至少两三个变量的情况。这让我想起
2:22:46your tweet about escaping competition through authenticity it sounds like part of this is a search for who you are it's both a search and a recognition because sometimes when we search our egos we want to be something that we aren't你那条关于“通过真实来逃离竞争”的推文。听起来其中一部分是对“我是谁”的探索。它既是探索,也是辨认,因为有时候我们的自我在探索时,我们想成为自己并不是的那种人,
2:23:00and our friends and family are better at telling us actually who we are or looking back at what we've done is a better indicator of who we are Peter teal talks a lot about how competition is besides the point it's而我们的朋友和家人更擅长告诉我们真实的自己是谁;或者回头看我们做过的事,那才是“我们是谁”更好的指标。Peter Thiel 经常讲竞争是无关紧要的,它是
2:23:12counterproductive we're highly mimetic creatures we copy what everybody else is doing around us we copy our desires from them everyone around me is a great artist I want to be an artist if everyone around me is a great business person反效果的。我们是高度模仿性的生物,我们复制周围每个人在做的事,我们从他们那里复制欲望。如果我周围每个人都是伟大的艺术家,我就想当艺术家;如果我周围每个人都是伟大的商人,
2:23:23I want to be a business person everybody around me as a social activists I want to be a social activist that's where my self-esteem will come from you have to be a little careful when you get caught up into these我就想当商人;如果我周围每个人都是社会活动家,我就想当社会活动家——我的自尊就来自那里。当你被卷入这些
2:23:33status games that you end up competing over things that aren't worth competing over so Peter Thiel talks about how he was gonna be a law clerk because he was in law school everybody around him wanted to be a law clerk地位游戏时要小心一点,你最终会为不值得竞争的东西去竞争。Peter Thiel 讲过,他本来要去当法官助理,因为他在法学院,他周围每个人都想当
2:23:43for a Supreme Court justice or some famous judge and he got rejected and that's what made him go into business so it helped him break out of a lesser game into a greater game so sometimes you just get trapped in最高法院大法官或者某位名法官的助理。他被拒绝了,这才促使他进入商界。所以这帮他从一个较小的游戏跳到一个更大的游戏。所以有时候你只是被困在
2:23:56the wrong game because you're competing and the best way to escape competition to get away from the specter of competition which is not just stressful and nerve-racking but will often drive you to just the wrong answer the way to escape错误的游戏里,因为你在竞争。逃离竞争、远离竞争这个幽灵的最好方式——竞争不仅压力大、伤神,还常常把你逼向错误的答案——逃离
2:24:08competition is to just be authentic to yourself if you are fundamentally building and marketing something that is just an extension of who you are no one can compete with you on that who's gonna compete with Joe Rogan or Scott Adams竞争的方式就是对自己真实。如果你从根本上在打造和营销的,只是“你是谁”的延伸,那就没人在这一点上能跟你竞争。谁会去跟 Joe Rogan 或 Scott Adams 竞争?
2:24:20it's impossible it's somebody else gonna come along and write a better Dilbert no it's someone going to compete with Bill Watterson and create a better Calvin and Hobbes no there being authentic this is easiest to see in art artists are不可能。会有别人来写出更好的《呆伯特》吗?不会。会有人去跟 Bill Watterson 竞争、创作出更好的《卡尔文与霍布斯》吗?不会。做真实的自己——这在艺术里最容易看出来,艺术家
2:24:32by definition all naturally authentic but even entrepreneurs are authentic who's gonna be Elon Musk who's gonna be Jack Dorsey these people are authentic and the businesses and products they create are authentic to their desires and their means if somebody else按定义天生就是真实的。但创业者也是真实的。谁能成为 Elon Musk?谁能成为 Jack Dorsey?这些人是真实的,他们创造的企业和产品忠于他们自己的欲望和手段。如果别人
2:24:46came along and started launching rockets I don't think would phase Elon one bit he's still gonna get to Mars because that's his you know insane as it seems the one he set for himself and he's gonna accomplish it so authenticity出现、也开始发射火箭,我觉得一点都不会影响 Elon。他仍然要去火星,因为那是他自己设定的目标——你知道,虽然听起来疯狂——他会实现它。所以真实
2:24:59naturally gets you away from competition it doesn't mean that you necessarily want to be authentic to the point where there's no product market fit it may turn out you're the best juggler on the unicycle but maybe there just isn't that天然让你远离竞争。但这不意味着你要真实到没有 product market fit 的地步。也许结果是你是在独轮车上最好的杂耍者,但也许这个
2:25:10much of a market for that even with YouTube videos so you gotta adjust that somehow until you find product market fit but at least lean towards authenticity towards getting away from competition and competition automatically leads towards copycatting and often towards市场并不大,即便有 YouTube 视频也一样。所以你得想办法调整,直到找到 product market fit。但至少要倾向于真实、倾向于远离竞争——竞争会自动导向模仿,而且常常导向
2:25:24just playing completely the wrong game especially an entrepreneurship the masses are never right if you see a lot of people tweeting about what a great market to enter is or you see journalists talking about a company is terrible they don't完全玩错游戏。尤其在创业里,大众从来不会对。如果你看到很多人在 Twitter 上说某个市场多值得进入,或者你看到记者说某家公司很糟糕,他们什么
2:25:38know anything if the masses knew how to build great things and create great wealth we'd already be done we'd already be rich by now so in a sense when you see a lot of competition sometimes that indicates to you that都不懂。如果大众知道如何打造伟大的东西、创造巨大的财富,那早就成了,我们早就富了。所以某种意义上,当你看到大量竞争时,有时候它是在告诉你:
2:25:51the masses are already here so it's already competed over too much and there's nothing here or it's in the wrong trend to begin with on the other hand if it's completely empty if the whole market is empty and no one's大众已经在这里了,所以这里已经被竞争过度,没什么机会;或者这本来就是个错误的趋势。另一方面,如果它完全空无一人,如果整个市场都是空的、没人在
2:26:01there that can also be a warning indicator that you've gone too authentic and not enough on the product market fit part of founder product market fit so there's a balance you have to find it but generally most people will make那里,那也可能是一个警示信号:你太偏向真实,而在 founder product market fit 里 product market fit 那一部分做得不够。所以有一个平衡,你必须找到它。但一般来说,大多数人会犯
2:26:14the mistake of paying too much attention to the competition and being too much like the competition and not being authentic enough and the great founders tend to be authentic iconoclasts I hate to bring up the scott adams skill stack one的错误是太关注竞争、太像竞争对手、不够真实。而伟大的创始人往往是真实的“反偶像者”。我不想再提 Scott Adams 的技能堆栈了,
2:26:30more time but also bring it up do you think one way of getting to authenticity is not necessarily adding some random skills that you think might be important but just really finding five or six various skills that you already authentically但还是得提一下:你觉得通往真实的一条路,不一定是要加一些你认为可能重要的随机技能,而是真正找出五六个你本来就在真实地
2:26:45do and just stacking them on top of each other and not even in any purposeful way if you are expressing who you are you're going to be expressing all these little five or six different skills anyway that's really where life做的技能,然后把它们叠在一起,甚至不需要带什么目的性?如果你在表达你自己,你本来就会表达出这五六个小技能。那其实正是人生
2:26:58is going to lead you anyway long term if you are good and successful at what you do you will find that whatever your hobbies were you're almost doing them for a as Robert Frost said you know combine your vocation and长期会把你带到的地方。如果你在所做的事上出色、成功,你会发现不管你原来的爱好是什么,你几乎都在把它们当成职业来做。就像 Robert Frost 说的,把你的职业和
2:27:12your avocation what you love to do and what you do do so I think you'll find yourself there anyway and you're right about the skill stack and that everyone's got multiple skills we aren't all one-dimensional creatures even though that's how副业结合起来——你热爱做的事和你实际做的事。所以我觉得你无论如何都会走到那里。关于技能堆栈你说得对,每个人都有多种技能,我们并不都是一维生物,尽管为了
2:27:22we have to portray ourselves and our online profiles to get employed you meet somebody and they say I'm a banker or I'm a bartender or I'm a barber or what have you all the B's but people are multivariate they have求职,我们不得不在网上档案里那样呈现自己。你遇到一个人,他说我是银行家、我是调酒师、我是理发师,诸如此类,都是 B 开头。但人是多变量的,他们有
2:27:34a lot of skills one banker might be going to finance another one might be good at sales the third one might be just good at macroeconomic trends and have a feel for the markets another one might be really good at很多技能。一个银行家可能擅长融资,另一个可能擅长销售,第三个可能就擅长宏观经济趋势、对市场有感觉,另一个可能非常擅长
2:27:43picking individual stocks you know another one might just be good at maintaining relationships rather than selling new relationships so everyone's gonna have their various niches and you're gonna have multiple niche it's not gonna be just one so over time you挑选个股,你知道,还有一个可能只是擅长维护关系,而不是开发新关系。所以每个人都会有自己各种细分定位,而且你会有多个细分定位,不会只有一个。所以随着时间,你
2:27:55will find as you go through your career both you will gravitate towards the things that you're good at which by definition are almost the things you enjoyed doing otherwise you wouldn't be good at them you wouldn't have put in the会发现,在职业发展过程中,一方面你会自然被自己擅长的事吸引——按定义,那几乎就是你享受做的事,否则你不会擅长,不会投入那些
2:28:05time and other people will push you towards the things that you're good at because you're smart bosses and you're smart coworkers and you're smart investors will realize okay you're really world class and this thing we can recruit somebody else for时间;另一方面别人也会把你推向自己擅长的事,因为你聪明的老板、聪明的同事、聪明的投资人会意识到:好,你在这件事上是世界级的,那件事我们招别人来做就行。
2:28:16that other thing so ideally you want to end up specializing in being you I think when you're being authentic you don't really mind competition that much yeah it pisses you off and it inspires some fear and jealousy and all the所以理想情况下,你最终要专精于“做你自己”。我觉得当你真实的时候,你其实不太在乎竞争。是的,它会惹你生气,会激起一些恐惧和嫉妒,以及所有
2:28:31other emotions that come along with it but also you don't really mind because you're more oriented towards the goal and the mission and worst case you get some ideas from them and there's often ways to work with the competition in随之而来的情绪,但你其实也不太在意,因为你更朝向目标和使命。最坏的情况,你从他们那里得到一些点子;而且通常有办法与竞争对手
2:28:45a positive way and it ends up increasing the size of the market for you yeah sometimes it depends on the nature of the business Silicon Valley tech industry businesses tend to be winner-take-all at least the good ones and so when以积极的方式合作,最终还会为你扩大市场规模。是的,有时候这取决于生意的性质。硅谷科技行业的企业往往是赢家通吃——至少那些好的企业如此。所以当
2:28:57you see competition it can make you fly into a rage because it really does endanger everything you've built whereas if I was opening a restaurant and a more interesting version the same restaurant opens up in a different town that's fantastic你看到竞争时,可能会暴怒,因为它确实危及你建立的一切。而如果我是开餐厅的,在另一个城市开了一家更有趣的同类型餐厅,那太好了,
2:29:10I'm just gonna lift from them what's working and drop what I can see that they have already figured out is not working so it does depend to some extent on the nature of the business that said even the businesses that我直接从他们那里学有效的做法,丢掉那些我看出他们已经验证无效的做法。所以这在一定程度上取决于生意的性质。话虽如此,即便是那些
2:29:21seem like that they are often in direct and really aren't they can end up adjacent or slightly different you're one step away from a completely different business and sometimes you need to take that one step and you're not gonna be看起来像是在直接竞争、其实并不是的生意,最终可能变成相邻的或略有不同的生意。你离一门完全不同的生意只有一步之遥,而有时候你需要迈出那一步,但如果你
2:29:32able to take it if you're busy fighting over a booby prize kind of you're playing a stupid game gonna win a stupid prize it's not obvious right now because you're blinded by competition but three years from now it'll be obvious忙着争夺一个安慰奖,你就迈不出那一步。玩愚蠢的游戏,就会赢得愚蠢的奖品。现在这并不明显,因为竞争蒙住了你的眼,但三年后就会很明显了。
2:29:43to give a simple example when I was first starting companies one of my first ones was called opinions which was an online product review site for all the products out there that was independent of Amazon and that space eventually turned举个简单的例子。我最早创业时,其中一家公司叫 Epinions,是一个独立于 Amazon 的在线产品评测网站,评测市面上的各种产品。那个领域后来变成了
2:29:55into TripAdvisor and Yelp which is where we should have gone we should have done more local reviews because there's more value to having a review of a scarce item like in your local restaurant there is of an item like aTripAdvisor 和 Yelp,那才是我们应该走的方向。我们应该做更多本地评测,因为评测一个稀缺物品的价值更高——比如你本地的一家餐厅,就比评测像
2:30:07camera which was gonna have a thousand reviews on Amazon but before we could get there we got caught up in the whole comparison shopping game and so we ended up merging with deal time and we competed with my Simon and相机这种在 Amazon 上会有一千条评测的东西更有价值。但在我们走到那一步之前,我们卷进了整个比价购物的大战,最后和 DealTime 合并,跟 mySimon、
2:30:18biz raid which became Shopzilla and PriceGrabber and next tag and a whole bunch of these price comparison engines and we're all caught and fierce competition with each other and that whole space went to zero because it turns out Amazon 1eBizRate(后来变成 Shopzilla)、PriceGrabber、NextTag 以及一大票比价引擎激烈竞争。我们全都陷在彼此的白热化竞争里,结果整个领域归零了,因为事实证明 Amazon
2:30:30tail completely so there was no need for price comparison everyone just went to Amazon but we got the booby prize because we were caught in a competition with a bunch of our peers when really we should have been looking at把所有东西都零售完了,比价根本没必要,大家直接去 Amazon。但我们拿到了安慰奖,因为我们陷在跟同行的竞争里,而真正应该做的是看
2:30:40what the consumer really wanted and being authentic to ourselves which was reviews in that price comparison and gone more and more into more and more esoteric items that needed to be reviewed where customers had less and less data and wanted消费者真正想要什么,对自己真实——那就是评测,而不是比价——并且越来越深入那些越来越冷门、更需要被评测的商品,那些地方顾客掌握的数据越来越少、却更
2:30:52reviews more badly so if we'd stayed authentic to ourselves we would have done better we're still talking about working for the long-term the next tweet on that topic is apply specific knowledge with leverage and eventually you will get what you急切地需要评测。所以如果我们坚持对自己真实,我们会做得更好。我们还在谈“为长期而工作”。这个话题的下一条推文是:把 specific knowledge 加上 leverage 去运用,最终你会得到你
2:31:08deserve I would also add to that apply judgment apply accountability and apply the skill of reading this one is just a glib way of saying that it takes time even once you have all of these pieces in place there is应得的。我还要加上:运用判断力、运用 accountability、运用阅读这项技能。这一条只是用一句顺口的话说明:这需要时间。即便你已经把所有这些拼图都放到位置,仍然有
2:31:22an indeterminate amount of time that you're gonna have to put in and if you're counting you will run out of patience before it actually arrives so you just have to make sure that you give these things a proper time life一段不确定长度的时间需要你投入。如果你在数日子,那在它真正到来之前你就会耗尽耐心。所以你只需要确保给这些事情足够的时间。人生
2:31:33is long Charlie Munger had some line on this somebody asked him about me him money and he reinterpreted that and he said what the questioner is actually asking is how do I get rich like you but faster before I end很长。Charlie Munger 对此有句话。有人问他挣钱的事,他重新解读了那个问题,他说:提问者真正问的是——我怎么才能像你一样富有,但更快,赶在我变成
2:31:44up as an really old guy and everybody wants it immediately but the world is an efficient place immediate doesn't work you do have to put in the time you do if you put in the hours and so I think you一个真正的老头子之前?每个人都想立刻得到,但世界是个有效率的市场,“立刻”行不通。你确实必须投入时间,你必须投入那些小时。所以我觉得你
2:31:54just have to put yourself in the position with the specific knowledge with the accountability with the leverage with the authentic skillset that you have to be the best in the world at what you do and then you have to enjoy只需要把自己放到那个位置上:带着 specific knowledge、带着 accountability、带着 leverage、带着你那份真实的技能组合,成为你所做之事的世界第一。然后你必须享受
2:32:05it and just keep doing it and keep doing it and keep doing it and don't keep track and don't keep count because if you do you will run out of time I can look back at my career and the people它,一直做下去、做下去、做下去,不要记账,不要计数,因为如果你数,你就会耗尽时间。回看我自己的职业生涯,那些人——
2:32:15two decades ago that I had identified as brilliant and hard-working but hadn't thought much more about it they're all successful now almost without exception on a long enough time scale you do get paid but it can easily be 10 or二十年前我就认定他们聪明又勤奋、但没再多想的那些人——现在几乎毫无例外都成功了。在足够长的时间尺度上,你确实会得到回报,但很容易要 10 年或者
2:32:2820 years sometimes it's five and if it's five or three and a friend of yours got there it can drive you insane but those are exceptions and for every winner there's multiple failures one thing that's important in entrepreneurship is you20 年,有时候是 5 年。如果是 5 年或 3 年,而你朋友已经到那儿了,那能把你逼疯。但那些是例外,每一个赢家背后都有多个失败者。创业中很重要的一点是:你
2:32:41just have to be right once you get many many shots on goal you can take a shot on goal every three to five years maybe every ten at the slowest or once every year at the fastest depending on how you're只需要对一次。你会得到很多很多次射门机会——每三到五年可以射一次门,最慢也许每十年一次,最快每年一次,取决于你
2:32:51iterating with startups but you really only have to be right once my little equation is that your eventual outcome will be equal to something like the distinctiveness of your specific knowledge times how much leverage you can apply to that knowledge在创业上如何迭代。但你真的只需要对一次。我的小方程式是:你最终的结果,大致等于你 specific knowledge 的独特程度,乘以你能对那份知识施加多少 leverage,
2:33:07times how often your judgment is correct times how singularly accountable you are for the outcome times how much society values what you're doing and then you compound all of that with how long you can keep doing it and how long乘以你的判断正确的频率,乘以你对结果有多独特地 accountable,乘以社会对你所做的事的估值,然后你把这一切用“你能坚持做多久”和“你能
2:33:23you can keep improving it through reading and learning that's actually a really good way to summarize it it's probably worth even trying to sketch that equation out that said people try to then apply mathematics it was really philosophy so I've通过阅读和学习持续改进它多久”来复利。这其实是总结它的一个非常好的方式,甚至值得试着把这个方程式画出来。话虽如此,人们会试图把它当数学来用,而它其实是哲学。所以我
2:33:37seen this happen in the past where I say one thing and then I say another thing that seemed contradictory if you treat as a math equation but it's obviously in different context and then people will say well you say that见过这种情况:我说一件事,然后又说另一件事,如果你把它当成数学方程式,它们看起来是矛盾的,但它们显然是在不同语境下。然后人们会说:你说
2:33:46desire is suffering that's the Buddhist saying and then you say that all greatness suffering so does that mean all greatness comes from desire and cycle this isn't math people he can't just start carrying variables around and forming absolute logical outputs“欲望即痛苦”,那是佛教的说法;然后你又说“一切伟大都伴随痛苦”,那是不是意味着一切伟大都来自欲望?这不是数学,各位。你不能随便把变量搬来搬去,得出绝对的逻辑结论。
2:33:59you have to know when to apply things so I think that is very useful to understand but at the same time one can't get too analytical about it it's what a physicist would call false precision when you take two made-up你必须知道什么时候该应用什么。所以我觉得理解这一点非常有用,但同时也不能对它过度分析。物理学家会把这种情况叫做“虚假精确”:你拿两个编造的
2:34:12estimates and you multiply them together and you get four degrees of precision those decimal points don't actually count you don't have that data you don't have that knowledge in a model the more estimated variables you have the greater the error估算值相乘,得到四位精度的结果——那些小数点其实不算数。你并没有那样的数据,你没有那样的知识。在一个模型里,估算变量越多,误差
2:34:24in the model so just adding more and more complexity to your decision-making process actually gets you a worse answer you're better off just picking the single biggest thing or two for example what am I really good at according to observation就越大。所以给你的决策过程不断加复杂度,反而会让你得到更差的答案。你不如只挑一两个最大的因素。比如:根据观察,我真正擅长什么?
2:34:40and according to people that I trust that the market values like that alone those two variables alone are probably good enough because if you're good at it you'll keep it up and if you're good at it you develop the judgment根据我信任的人的看法,市场看重什么?——光这两个变量大概就足够了。因为如果你擅长它,你就会坚持下去;如果你擅长它,你就会发展出判断力;
2:34:50and if you're good at it and you like to do it eventually people will give you the resources and you won't be afraid to take on accountability so all the other pieces will fall in place product market fit is inevitable如果你擅长它、又喜欢做它,最终人们会给你资源,你也不会害怕承担 accountability。于是其他所有拼图都会各就各位,product market fit 是必然的。
2:35:00if you're doing something you love to do and the market wants it regarding the guy that gets rich in five years one of the tweets that you had on the cutting room floor was avoid people who got rich quickly they're如果你做的事是你热爱的,而且市场也想要它。说到那个“五年内致富”的人,你有一条被剪掉的推文是:远离那些快速致富的人,他们
2:35:15just giving you their winning lottery ticket numbers this is generally true of advice anyway which is it's back to Scott Adams systems not goals if you ask a specific person what worked for them very often it's just like they're reading只是在给你念他们的中奖彩票号码。这其实对建议来说普遍成立,这又回到了 Scott Adams 说的“要系统,不要目标”。如果你问某个具体的人什么对他有效,往往就像他在朗读
2:35:30out the exact set of things that work for them which may not be applicable for you they're just reading your winning lottery ticket numbers it's a little glib there is something to be learned from them but you can't just take那套恰好对他有效的东西,而那可能并不适用于你。他们只是在给你念中奖彩票号码。这话有点刻薄,从他们身上确实能学到东西,但你不能直接
2:35:40their exact circumstance and map it onto yours the best founders I know they listen and read to everyone but then they ignore everybody and they make up their own mind they have their own internal model of how to apply things把他们的具体处境套到你身上。我认识的最好的创始人,他们会听所有人、读所有人的东西,然后就无视所有人,自己下判断。他们有一套自己内在的模型,来决定如何把事情
2:35:55to their situation and they do not hesitate to discard information if you survey enough people all the advice will cancel a zero so you do have to have your own point of and when something is sent your way you have应用到自己的处境上,而且毫不犹豫地丢弃信息。如果你调查足够多的人,所有建议会相互抵消归零。所以你确实必须有自己的观点。当有什么东西送到你面前时,你
2:36:07to very quickly decide is that true outside of the context of what that person applied it in is it true in my context and then do I want to apply it you have to reject most advice but you have to必须很快判断:在那个人的语境之外,它成立吗?在我的语境里成立吗?然后我想不想用它?你必须拒绝大部分建议,但你必须
2:36:19listen to and read enough of it to know what to reject and what to accept even in this podcast you should examine everything if something does not feel true to you put it down set it aside if too many things听、读足够多的建议,才知道该拒绝什么、接受什么。即便在这个播客里,你也应该审视一切。如果某个东西对你来说感觉不真实,就放下它、搁置它。如果太多东西
2:36:30seem untrue delete this podcast I think the most dangerous part of taking advice is that the person that gave it to you is not going to be around to tell you when it doesn't apply any longer yet I view the看起来不真实,就删掉这个播客。我觉得接受建议最危险的地方在于:给你建议的人不会在你身边,告诉你它什么时候不再适用了。不过我对
2:36:43purpose of advice as a little different than most people I just view it as helping me have anecdotes and Maxim's that I can then later recall when I have my own direct experience and say ah that's what that person meant建议的用途看法跟大多数人有点不同。我只是把它看作帮我积累一些轶事和箴言,之后当我有了自己的直接经验时,可以回想起来说:啊,原来那个人是这个意思。
2:36:5890% of my tweets are actually just Maxim's that I carve for myself there are then little mental hooks to remind me when I'm in that situation again like oh I'm the one who tweeted if you can't see yourself working with我 90% 的推文其实都是我为我自己刻的箴言,它们是一些小小的心理挂钩,提醒我当我再次陷入那种情境时——比如:哦,我就是那个发推说“如果你无法想象自己
2:37:10someone for life then don't work with them for a day so as soon as I know that this person is not gonna be someone that I'm gonna be working with 10 years from now then I have to start extricated myself和某人共事一辈子,那就一天都不要跟他共事”的人。所以一旦我知道这个人不会是我十年后还会共事的人,我就得开始把自己抽离出来,
2:37:19in that relationship or just not investing that much more effort into it so I use my tweets and other people's tweets as that help compress my own learnings and be able to recall them because you know the brain space is从那段关系里抽离,或者干脆不再投入那么多精力。所以我把自己的推文和其他人的推文当作压缩我自己所学的方式,好让它们能被回想起来,因为你知道,大脑空间是
2:37:32finite you finite neurons so you can almost think of these as pointers addresses mnemonics to help you remember deep-seated principles where you have the underlying experience to back it up if you don't have the underlying experience then it's just reads有限的,神经元也有限。所以你几乎可以把它们看作指针、地址、记忆术,帮你记住那些根深蒂固的原则——前提是你有底层经验去支撑它。如果你没有底层经验,那它读起来
2:37:47like a collection of quotes it's like it's cool it's inspirational for a moment maybe you make a nice poster out of it but then you forget it and move on so all of these are really just compact ways for you就只是一堆语录。就像:挺酷的,有那么一刻很励志,也许你还能做张不错的海报,然后你就忘了它,继续往前走。所以所有这些,其实都只是让你
2:37:57to recall your own knowledge the last tweet on the topic of working for the long term is that when you're finally wealthy you'll realize that it wasn't what you were seeking in the first place but that's for another day that's回想起自己知识的紧凑方式。关于“为长期而工作”的最后一条推文是:当你终于富有时,你会意识到它并不是你最初追寻的东西。但那是另一个话题了,那
2:38:10a multi-hour topic in of itself first was thought it was a really clever way to end the whole thing because it disarms a whole set of people who'd say well you know what some point I get enriched because are a本身就是一个要讲好几小时的话题。Nivi 觉得这是结束整件事的非常聪明的方式,因为它卸下了一整类人的防备——他们会说:你知道,到某个时候我确实会致富,因为
2:38:20lot of people who just like the status signal virtue signal against the idea of wealth creation or making money so it was just a good way to disarm all of them but it's also true in that the things that you有很多人就是喜欢用地位信号、道德信号来反对财富创造或者赚钱这个想法。所以这是卸下他们所有人防备的好办法。但它同时也是真的:你
2:38:31really want in life yes money will solve all your money problems but it doesn't get you everywhere the first thing you'll realize when you've made a bunch of money is that you're still the same person if you're happy you're happy真正想要的东西——是的,钱会解决你所有的钱的问题,但它不能把你带到所有地方。当你赚到一大笔钱后,你意识到的第一件事是:你还是同一个人。如果你快乐,你就快乐;
2:38:43if you're unhappy if you're calm and fulfilled and peaceful you're still that same person I know lots of very rich people who are extremely out of shape I know lots of rich people who have really bad family lives I know如果你不快乐;如果你平静、充实、安宁,你还是那个人。我认识很多非常富有的人,身材极度走样;我认识很多富人,家庭生活非常糟糕;我认识
2:38:56lots of rich people who are internally a mess so I would lean on another tweet that I put out which is actually when I think back on it I think it's my favorite tweet of mine it's not initially the most很多富人,内里一团乱。所以我要倚重我发过的另一条推文。回想起来,我觉得那是我最喜欢的一条推文。它一开始并不是最
2:39:07insightful it's not nearly the most helpful it's not even the one I think about the most but I just when I look at it there's just such a certain truth in there that it just resonates and that is that a有洞见的,也远不是最有用的,甚至不是我想得最多的那条,但当我看着它时,其中就有那么一种确凿的真理,让人产生共鸣。那就是:一颗
2:39:17calm mind a fit body and a house full of love these things cannot be bought they must be earned even if you have all the money in the world you can't have those three things Jeff Bezos still has to work平静的心、健康的身体、充满爱的家——这些东西买不到,必须靠自己去挣得。即便你有世界上所有的钱,你也无法拥有这三样东西。Jeff Bezos 还是必须
2:39:27out he still has to work in his marriage or whatever his next relationship is and his internal mental state is still gonna be very much not controlled by external events it's gonna be based on how calm and peaceful he's inside锻炼身体;他还是必须在婚姻里、或者他下一段关系里下功夫;他的内在心理状态仍然很大程度上不受外部事件控制,而是取决于他内心有多平静、多安宁。
2:39:39so I think those three things your health your mental health and your close relationships are things that you have to cultivate and can probably bring you a lot more peace and happiness than any amount of money ever will so that's所以我觉得那三样东西——你的健康、你的心理健康、你的亲密关系——是必须去培育的,它们大概能给你带来比任何数量的金钱都多得多的平静和幸福。这就是
2:39:52what I meant now how to get there is actually a tweet storm that I still need to put out I've been working on it I have probably a hundred tweets on it it's just very hard to say anything on the我的意思。至于怎么达到那里,那其实是我还需要发布的一条推文串。我一直在写,大概有一百条草稿,只是在这个话题上说任何话都很难,
2:40:02topic without getting attacked from fifty different directions especially these days on Twitter so I've been hesitant to do it because I want to target it for a very specific kind of person there's a bunch of people who don't believe that不招来五十个方向的攻击,尤其是现在在 Twitter 上。所以一直犹豫要不要发,因为我想把它瞄准一类非常特定的人。有一群人,他们不相信
2:40:14working on your internal state is useful they're too focused on the external and that's fine there's nothing wrong with that they should do that and that's who they how to get rich tweet storm is for there's a bunch of people修炼内在状态有用,他们太专注外部,那也没问题,没什么不对,他们就该那样做——“如何致富”这条推文串正是给他们的。还有一群人
2:40:24who believe that the only thing worth working on is complete liberation like you become the Buddha and they'll attack anything in the middle as being useless that's fine too most people aren't there so what I want to do is to相信唯一值得修炼的是彻底解脱,比如你成为佛陀,他们会攻击中间任何东西都是没用的。那也没关系,大多数人还没到那一步。所以我想做的是
2:40:35create a tweet storm that is just very practical advice for everyday people who want to have a calmer internal state just a set of understandings realizations have truths and truths that if you were to imbibe them properly and again these写一条推文串,给那些想要内心更平静的普通人一些非常实用的建议,就是一组理解、领悟、真理——如果你能正确地吸收它们,而且再说一次,这些
2:40:50are just pointers to ideas that you already have and experiences that you already have that if you keep these top of mind slowly but steadily it will help you with certain realizations that will lead you to a kamar internal state只是指向你已有的想法和已有经验的指针——如果你把这些保持在意识里,缓慢但稳定地,它会帮你达成某些领悟,把你带向更平静的内在状态。
2:41:03that's I want to work on Fitness is another big one I'm just not the expert there there are plenty of good people on Twitter who are better at Fitness than me and I think loving household and relationships actually automatically falls那是我想要去做的。健身是另一个大块,我只是不是那方面的专家。Twitter 上有很多很好的人,在健身方面比我强。而且我觉得充满爱的家庭和关系,其实会自动
2:41:15out of the other things if you have a calm mind and if you've already made money you should have good relationship there's no reason why you shouldn't a lot of divorces actually happen over money unfortunately that's just the reality of从其他东西里衍生出来。如果你有一颗平静的心,而且你已经赚到了钱,你就应该有好的关系,没有理由不该有。不幸的是,很多离婚其实都是因为钱,这就是
2:41:27it so having money removes that part of it a lot of external battles happen because your internal state is not good when you're naturally internally peaceful you're gonna pick less fights you're gonna be more loving without expecting anything in return现实。所以有钱就消除了那一部分。很多外部的争斗之所以发生,是因为你的内在状态不好。当你内在天然平静时,你会少挑争端,你会更有爱,且不期待任何回报,
2:41:41and that will take care of things on the external relationship front so money solves your money problems money buys you freedom in the material world I think that was a tweet from your cutting room floor and money lets you not那就会把外部关系层面的事情处理好。所以钱解决你的钱的问题;钱在物质世界里为你买来自由——我记得这是你被剪掉的一条推文——钱让你不必
2:41:56do the things that you don't want to do yeah to me the ultimate purpose of money is so that you do not have to be in a specific place at a specific time doing anything you don't want to do we去做你不想做的事。是的,对我来说,钱的终极目的就是让你不必在特定的时间、特定的地点,做任何你不想做的事。
2:42:06skipped one tweet because I wanted to cover all of the tweets on the topic of the long term and the tweet that we skipped was there are no get-rich-quick schemes that's just someone else getting rich off you this goes back我们跳过了一条推文,因为我想把关于长期的所有推文都覆盖到,而跳过的那条是:不存在快速致富的方案,那只是别人靠你致富。这又回到了
2:42:20to the world being an efficient place if there's an easy way to get rich it's already been exploited and there are a lot of people who will sell you ideas and schemes on how to make money but they're just always世界是个有效率的市场:如果有一条容易的致富之路,它早就被利用完了。有很多人会卖给你赚钱的点子和方案,但他们永远只是
2:42:32selling you some 7995 course or some audio book or some seminar which is fine everyone needs to eat people need to make living they might actually have really good tips but if they're giving you actionable high-quality advice that acknowledges that在卖给你一个 79.95 美元的课程、一本有声书或者一个研讨会。这也没什么,人人都要吃饭,人都要谋生,他们可能真的有很好的技巧。但如果他们给你的是可执行的高质量建议,并且承认
2:42:48it's a difficult journey and will take a lot of time then I think that's realistic but if they're selling you some get-rich-quick scheme whether it's crypto or whether it's an online business or seminar they're just making money off you that's这是一段艰难的旅程、需要很多时间,那我认为这是现实的。但如果他们卖给你某种快速致富的方案——不管是加密货币、在线生意还是研讨会——他们只是在从你身上赚钱,那
2:42:59their get-rich-quick scheme it's not gonna necessarily work for you one of the things about this whole tweet storm and podcast is that we don't have ads on here we don't charge for anything we don't sell anything not because I don't就是他们的快速致富方案,它不一定对你有用。关于这整条推文串和这期播客,有一点是:我们这里没有广告,我们不收任何费用,我们不卖任何东西。不是因为我不
2:43:10want to make more money it's always nice to make more money we're doing work here but because it would completely destroy the credibility of the enterprise if I'm saying hey I know how to get rich and I'm gonna sell that想赚更多钱——能多赚钱总是好事,我们在这里也是在做事——而是因为,如果我说“嘿,我知道怎么致富,我要把这个卖给你”,那会彻底摧毁这件事的可信度。
2:43:20to you it ruins it when I was young and I was kind of studying up on the topic one of my favorite books on the topic was actually called how to get rich by Felix Dennis the founder of Maxim magazine那会毁掉它。我年轻时研究这个主题,我最喜欢的一本书之一,恰好就叫《How to Get Rich》,作者是《Maxim》杂志的创始人 Felix Dennis,
2:43:31billionaire who passed away and he had a lot of crazy stuff in there but he had some really good insights too but whenever I read something by him or by the GoDaddy founder Bob Parsons or say Andrew Carnegie now you一位已经去世的亿万富翁。书里有很多疯狂的东西,但他也有一些非常好的洞见。每当我读他写的东西,或者 GoDaddy 创始人 Bob Parsons 写的,或者 Andrew Carnegie 写的——你
2:43:43read stuff by people who are already very wealthy and they've clearly made their wealth in other fields not by selling the how to get rich line they have a credibility you just trust them and they're not trying to make money读那些已经非常富有的人写的东西,而他们的财富显然是在别的领域赚来的,不是靠卖“如何致富”的套路。他们有一种可信度,你就是信任他们,而且他们并不是想从你身上
2:43:54off of you they are obviously trying to win some status and some ego right you always have to have a motivation for doing something but at least that is a cleaner reason why they're probably not lying they're probably not fooling赚钱。他们显然是想赢得一些地位和自尊,对吧,你做任何事总得有个动机。但至少那是个更干净的动机,所以他们大概没有撒谎,大概没有在骗
2:44:05you they're not slowing you at some level every founder has to lie to every employee of the company that they have where they have to convince them that it's better for you to work for me then is to do what你。从某种层面上说,每个创始人都必须对自己公司的每个员工说某种谎——他们必须说服员工:为我工作比去做
2:44:17I did and go work for yourself so I've always had a hard time with that which is why the only honest with in my companies I've recruited entrepreneurs and I tell them you're gonna get to be entrepreneurial in this company我做过的事、去自己创业更好。所以我一直很难接受这一点。这也是为什么我在自己公司里唯一诚实的做法是:我招创业者,我告诉他们,你会在这家公司里获得创业的机会,
2:44:27and the day you're ready to go start your own next thing I'm gonna support you I'm never gonna get in the way of you starting a company but this can be a good place for you to learn how to build等你准备好去开创你自己的下一件事的那一天,我会支持你。我永远不会阻碍你去创办公司。但这里可以是一个好地方,让你学习如何打造
2:44:36a good team and build a good culture how to find product market fit to perfect your skills and meet some amazing people while you figure out exactly what is you gonna do because positioning timing deliberation are very important when starting一个好团队、建立一种好文化,学习如何找到 product market fit、打磨你的技能、认识一些了不起的人,同时想清楚你到底要做什么。因为创业时,定位、时机、深思熟虑都非常重要。
2:44:50a company but what I've never been able to do is look them in the face and say you must be at your desk by 8:00 a.m. because I'm not gonna be at my desk by 8:00 a.m. I want my freedom但我从来做不到的事,是当着他们的面说:你必须在早上 8 点前坐到工位上。因为我不会在早上 8 点坐到工位上,我要我的自由。
2:44:58or say that you're great at being a director today and you'll be a VP tomorrow you know putting them into that career path track because I don't believe in it if anyone is giving advice on how to get rich and或者说:你今天做总监做得很好,明天你就是副总裁了——你知道,把他们放进那条职业路径轨道里,因为我不信那套。如果有人给致富建议,
2:45:09they're also making money off of it they should have made their money elsewhere like you don't learn how to be fit from a fat person you don't wanna learn how to be happy from a depressed person so you don't wanna同时又从中赚钱,那他们的钱本该在别处赚到。就像你不会跟一个胖子学怎么健身,你不会想跟一个抑郁的人学怎么快乐,所以你也不
2:45:19learn how to be rich from poor person but you also don't want to learn how to be rich from somebody who makes their money by telling people how to be rich it's suspect anytime you see somebody who's actually gotten rich想跟一个穷人学怎么致富,但你也不想跟一个靠教别人致富来赚钱的人学致富——那很可疑。任何时候你看到有人真的靠
2:45:31following some gurus advice on getting rich just remember that in any random process if you run it long enough and if enough people participate in it you will always get every single possible outcome with probability one there's a lot of追随某个大师的致富建议而致富了,只要记住:在任何随机过程中,如果你运行得足够久、参与的人足够多,你总会以概率 1 得到每一种可能的结果。这里面有大量
2:45:48random error in there and then also this is why you have to absolutely and completely ignore business journalists and economists academics when they talk about private companies I won't even name names but like when a famous economist rails on Bitcoin随机误差。这也是为什么你必须绝对、彻底地无视商业记者,以及经济学家、学者在谈论私营公司时说的话。我甚至不点名,但比如某位著名经济学家猛烈抨击 Bitcoin,
2:45:59or when a business journalist attacks the latest company that's IP owing it's complete nonsense those people have never built anything they're professional critics they don't know anything about making money all they know is how to criticize and get page views或者某个商业记者攻击最新 IPO 的公司——那完全是胡说。那些人从来没建造过任何东西,他们是职业批评者,对赚钱一无所知,他们只会批评和赚取页面浏览量。
2:46:12and you are literally becoming Dumbo by reading them you are burning neurons I'll leave you with a quote from the same Talib that I liked where he said if you want to be a philosopher King first become a king and你读他们的东西,简直就是在把自己变成 Dumbo,在烧神经元。我用同一位 Taleb 的一句话来收尾,我很喜欢那句:如果你想成为哲学王,先成为国王,
2:46:23then become a philosopher not first become a philosopher and then become a king I'm glad you brought up Talib because I was gonna finish this by saying just remember the title of his first book which is fooled by randomness one然后成为哲学家;而不是先成为哲学家,再成为国王。很高兴你提到 Taleb,因为我本来想用这句话收尾:记住他第一本书的书名——《Fooled by Randomness》(被随机性愚弄)。
2:46:37of the reasons why we're a little vague in this podcast is because we're trying to lay down principles that are timeless as opposed to just giving you the winning lottery ticket numbers from yesterday you summarized this entire Tweed storm with我们在这期播客里有点含糊的原因之一,是我们试图立下一些永恒的普适原则,而不是只给你昨天中奖的彩票号码。你用两个词总结了这整条推文串:
2:46:49two words productize yourself productize and yourself yourself has uniqueness productize has leverage yourself has accountability productize has specific knowledge yourself also has specific knowledge in there so all of these pieces you can combine them into these two words whenever you'reproductize yourself。productize 意味着 leverage,yourself 意味着独特性;yourself 有 accountability,productize 有 specific knowledge,yourself 里面也有 specific knowledge。所以所有这些片段你都能组合进这两个词里。每当你在
2:47:10doing anything in business if you're looking towards a long term getting wealthy you should ask yourself is this authentic to me is it myself that I'm projecting and then am i productizing it am i scaling it am i scaling with做生意、做任何事,如果你着眼长期、想致富,你就该问自己:这对我真实吗?我投射的是我自己吗?然后我在把它产品化吗?我在把它规模化吗?我是用
2:47:23labour or with capital or with code or with media so it's a very handy simple mnemonic I mean what is this podcast this is a podcast called nevah land literally productizing myself with a podcast you want to figure out what劳动力、资本、代码还是媒体来规模化?所以这是个非常方便、简单的记忆法。我是说,这个播客是什么?这是一个叫 Naval 的播客,字面上就是用一个播客把自己产品化。你要弄清楚
2:47:36you're uniquely good at or what you uniquely are and apply as much leverage as possible so making money isn't even something you do it's not a skill it's who you are stamped out a million times making money should be a你独特擅长什么,或者你独特地是什么,然后施加尽可能多的 leverage。所以赚钱甚至不是你所做的一件事,它不是一项技能,它是“你是谁”被复制一百万次。赚钱应该是
2:47:53function of your identity and what you like to do another tweet that I really liked was this was not mine somebody else put this up they said find three hobbies one that makes you money one that keeps you fit and你身份和喜好的一个函数。另一条我很喜欢的推文——这条不是我写的,是别人发的——说:找三个爱好,一个让你赚钱,一个让你保持健康,
2:48:03one that makes you creative I would change that slightly so I would say one that makes you money one that makes you fit and one that makes you smarter so in my case my hobbies would be reading making money as一个让你有创造力。我会稍微改一下:一个让你赚钱,一个让你保持健康,一个让你更聪明。所以对我来说,我的爱好是阅读、赚钱——
2:48:14I love working with startups either investing in them brainstorming them starting them I just love that ideation and initial creation phase around startups and then on the hobby that keeps you fit I don't really have one closest thing I have我喜欢和创业公司打交道,投资它们、跟它们头脑风暴、创办它们,我就是喜欢围绕创业公司的那个构思和最初创造的阶段。至于保持健康的爱好,我其实没有,最接近的
2:48:26is yoga but that's where I fell apart and I think people who early in life discover something like surfing or swimming or tennis or some sport that they continue doing throughout most of their life are very lucky because they found是瑜伽,但我在那上面掉链子了。我觉得那些在人生早期就发现冲浪、游泳、网球或某项运动,并在此后大半生里一直坚持的人非常幸运,因为他们找到了
2:48:38a hobby that'll make them fit we've finished discussing the tweet storm and we're going to spend some time on Q&A and discussing some of the tweets on the cutting room floor that didn't make it into the tweet storm my first一个能让他们保持健康的爱好。我们讨论完了那条推文串,接下来要花些时间做问答,聊聊那些被剪掉的、没能进入推文串的推文。我的第一个
2:48:52question is do you think there are some common failure modes or typical things that people do wrong when they're trying to apply this advice a lot of people don't understand what specific knowledge really is or how to quote unquote obtain问题是:你觉得人们在尝试应用这些建议时,有没有一些常见的失败模式或者典型的错误做法?很多人并不真正理解 specific knowledge 是什么,或者所谓“如何获得
2:49:05it people don't understand what accountability really entails they think that accountability means being successfully accountable no it means that you have to stick your neck out and fail with your name out there publicly and be willing to let people hate它”。人们不理解 accountability 真正意味着什么。他们以为 accountability 就是成功地负起责任。不,它意味着你必须把脖子伸出去,以你的名字公开地失败,并且愿意让别人恨
2:49:19on you one of the reasons I'm less active and Twitter lately is because every tweet summons an army of nit pickers and haters and it gets exhausted but on the other hand you have to learn how to ignore them otherwise你。我最近在 Twitter 上不那么活跃的原因之一,就是每条推文都会招来一支挑刺和喷子的大军,很累。但另一方面,你必须学会无视他们,否则
2:49:30you can survive on Twitter a lot of people try to reconcile it with like should I quit my nine-to-five job or not that can be a very hard decision I don't think you need to go that extreme you can start你在 Twitter 上活不下去。很多人试图把这跟“我该不该辞掉朝九晚五的工作”协调起来,那可能是个非常难的决定。我不认为你需要走到那么极端。你可以
2:49:39applying accountability and leverage and specific knowledge even within your existing career it doesn't have to necessarily be fork off and do something else completely a lot of people will use it as a way to agree and disagree with their existing在你现有的职业里就开始应用 accountability、leverage 和 specific knowledge,不一定非得岔出去、完全做别的事。很多人会用它来对自己已有的
2:49:53biases they'll say oh yeah I agree with that part or that part you're completely wrong the most interesting part should be the ones that you disagree with because clearly that proven that I know a few things so if you disagree偏见表示赞同或反对,他们会说:哦对,我同意这部分、那部分;你完全错了。最有意思的部分应该是你不同意的那些,因为那显然证明我确实懂一些东西。所以如果你不同意
2:50:04with it then maybe that is an area where you can improve your thinking I've definitely improved my thinking all the time but I will tell you that in this tweets term I put down the minimum viable principles I did not某一点,那也许正是你可以改进思考的地方。我当然一直在改进我的思考。但我要告诉你,在这条推文串里,我写下的只是“最小可行原则”,我并没有
2:50:16put down the whole universe of what I know about how to make money because 90% of it is suspect I put down the bedrock the stuff that I'm pretty solidly sure about and I have not yet seen a tweet that写下我所知的关于赚钱的全部宇宙,因为其中 90% 都是可疑的。我写下的是基石,是我相当确定的东西。而且我至今还没看到一条推文
2:50:28has successfully contradicted anything in this tweet storm that would cause me to say oh yeah I got that one wrong think another place where people get a little bit off is they look at this and they say well this only成功地反驳了这条推文串里的任何一点,能让我说:哦对,那条我搞错了。人们容易出偏差的另一个地方是,他们看到这个就说:好吧,这只
2:50:38applies to tech entrepreneurs I disagree the example that I gave about real estate was a good one in that regard it's just the nature of leverage that technology drives leverage so I'm gonna push you in a tech direction to get适用于科技创业者。我不同意。我举的房地产的例子在这一点上就很好。这只是 leverage 的本质决定的:技术会驱动 leverage。所以我会把你往技术方向推,去拿到
2:50:53the free leverage that is available in tech and obviously this message is being delivered through the internet so it's going to have a pro internet bias there are also people who believe that it is unfair to the people who don't技术里那些免费的 leverage。显然,这个信息是通过互联网传递的,所以它会带有偏向互联网的倾向。还有人认为,这对那些没有
2:51:05have these opportunities to do anything with the opportunites that they do have well that defeatist attitude why even get out of bed in the morning ninety percent of people are dead there's a lot of people who are living on a这些机会的人不公平。那用他们确实拥有的机会去做点什么啊。那种失败主义态度——那你早上干嘛还起床?百分之九十的人已经死了;有很多人每天靠一
2:51:15dollar a day do you live on a dollar a day no it's up to you to play the hand that you're dealt to the best of your ability and then you can take the winnings the pot from that hand and美元生活。你靠一天一美元生活吗?不是。尽力打好你手上这副牌,是你的责任。然后你可以拿这副牌赢来的钱、那个底池,
2:51:24do whatever you want with it to fix the world but saying that you should not do things just because others can't do things is living in denial it's an excuse to not do anything there are also people who believe that随你怎么用,去修复这个世界。但说“因为别人做不到,所以你也不该去做”,那是活在否认里,那是不做任何事的借口。还有人认为
2:51:35wealth creation is fundamentally at odds with an environmentally safe and healthy and they view the whole thing is a giant zero-sum game that's a false narrative as well Elon Musk is not playing a zero-sum game with the environment and there财富创造与环境安全和健康从根本上冲突,他们把整件事看成一个巨大的零和游戏。那也是一种虚假叙事。Elon Musk 并没有在与环境玩零和游戏,
2:51:50are plenty of entrepreneurs who are not if anything there is a word that environmentalists love which is sustainability and for-profit businesses are at least financially sustainable if nothing else you can do a B Corp which has a dual mission a而且有很多创业者也不是。要说的话,环保人士很喜欢一个词:可持续。而营利性企业至少在财务上是可持续的。退一步说,你可以做一家 B Corp,它有双重使命,
2:52:03lot of nonprofit efforts would actually be better served by for-profit companies because then they wouldn't have to go begging for grants all the time they would be financially sustainable some great founders realized their philanthropic visions by running a business who很多非营利事业其实由营利性公司来做会更好,因为那样他们就不用一直去乞求资助,他们在财务上会可持续。一些伟大的创始人就是通过经营企业来实现自己的慈善愿景。这
2:52:18is this advice targeted to is it for my lyft driver is it for an internet entrepreneur is it for somebody who wants to start a YouTube channel because it comes from someone who's steeped in Silicon Valley and tech companies it's条建议是给谁的?是给我那个 Lyft 司机?还是给一个互联网创业者?还是给一个想开 YouTube 频道的人?因为它来自一个浸淫在硅谷和科技公司里的人,
2:52:33always gonna have a bias towards that but I think it's good for anybody who wants to be entrepreneurial anybody who wants to control their own life anybody who wants to deterministically and reliably improve their ability to create wealth over time所以它总会带有那种偏向。但我认为它对任何想有创业精神的人、任何想掌控自己生活的人、任何想确定且可靠地提升自己长期创造财富能力的人都适用,
2:52:48is patient and looking at for the long haul it's certainly if you're 80 years old retired running out of energy you should probably just stay retired but there are 80 year olds who haven't a lot of energy and want to只要他们有耐心、看长期。当然,如果你八十岁、已退休、精力快耗尽,你大概就该继续退休。但有些八十岁的人精力还很充沛,想做
2:52:59do new things and live for the future it can obviously apply very easily to a young person I would say 910 years old and up the most difficult one it's probably middle-aged because when we're in our 30s 40s 50s we新的事、为未来而活。它显然很容易适用于年轻人,我会说九、十岁以上都行。最困难的可能是中年,因为我们三十、四十、五十多岁时,
2:53:12already have a lot invested we have a lot of obligations because those the years where we're earning and people are relying upon us we don't want to change because we don't want to admit defeat in what we've been doing to已经投入了很多,背负了很多义务,因为那些年是我们在赚钱、别人在依靠我们的年份。我们不想改变,因为我们不想承认自己迄今为止所做的事
2:53:23date but that's where it can actually be the most fruitful it may be the most difficult pivot you have a 9 to 5 job leave a family relying upon you and so it may seem like the things in this podcast失败了。但那恰恰可能是最有成果的地方,它可能是最困难的一次转向。你有一份朝九晚五的工作,有一个依靠你的家庭。所以这个播客里的东西可能看起来
2:53:33are far too idealistic but maybe it can inform your weekend projects maybe it can inform your self free education that you do at night on the internet maybe it can inform what roles you take on in the company that you're太理想化了。但也许它可以启发你的周末项目,也许可以启发你晚上在互联网上做的自我教育,也许可以影响你在所在公司里承担什么角色——
2:53:45at because they move you closer and closer to points of leverage points of judgment or points where you're naturally good at and you're authentic it might cause you to take on more accountable I even applied Pease meals these principles can因为这些角色让你越来越靠近 leverage 的节点、判断力的节点,或者你天生擅长、真实自然的节点。它可能会促使你承担更多责任。即便是我,也应用了这些原则。它们可以
2:53:58directionally guide you regardless of what stage you are at in life short of retirement and if you're in retirement just test them to see if they're true and then teach them to your kids or your grandkids there's many different ways在方向上指引你,无论你处在人生的哪个阶段——除了退休。如果你已经退休,那就检验它们是否真实,然后教给你的孩子或孙辈。有很多不同的方式
2:54:08to participate it should really apply to almost everybody who has complete body sound mind and is looking to work I think one way to apply the advice is to look at who is getting the leverage off of the work that去参与。它其实应该适用于几乎所有身体健全、头脑清醒、并且想工作的人。我觉得应用这些建议的一种方式是:看看谁在从你做的
2:54:23you're doing look up the value chain look at who's above you and who is above them and see how they are taking advantage of the time and the work that you're doing and how they're applying leverage to it people do工作中获取 leverage。往价值链上看,看看谁在你上面、谁又在他们上面,看看他们如何利用你的时间和你的工作,以及他们如何对之施加 leverage。人们会
2:54:36that naturally in that they want to move up the corporate ladder but that's mostly about managing other people and what you really want to be doing is managing more capital products media and community people think about moving up the ladder自然地这么做,因为他们想爬上企业阶梯,但那主要是在管理其他人。你真正想做的,是管理更多资本、产品、媒体和社群。人们会想在企业内部往上爬,
2:54:50in their organization but they don't think that often about moving to a different organization or creating their own organization to get more leverage in general ceteris paribus fancy latin words for all other things equal you will do better in a但不太常想到换一个组织,或者创建自己的组织,来获得更多 leverage。总的来说,ceteris paribus——一个花哨的拉丁词,意思是“其他条件不变”——在
2:55:05smaller organization than a larger one you will have more accountability it'll be more visible you are more likely to be able to try on multiple things to find out the thing that you are uniquely good at people are more likely一个更小的组织里,你会比在更大的组织里做得更好。你会有更多 accountability,会更显眼,你更有可能尝试多种事情,找出你独特擅长的那一件。人们更可能
2:55:18to give you leverage through battlefield promotions you're gonna have more flexibility there will be more authenticity to how the company operates a good progression for careers start out in a large company and then progressively move to smaller and smaller ones通过“战场提拔”给你 leverage,你会有更多灵活性,公司运作方式也会更真实。一条好的职业发展路径是:先在大公司起步,然后逐步转向越来越小的公司。
2:55:30it's very hard to go from a small company to work in a larger company larger companies tend to be more about politics and less about merit they're more stable but they're less innovative situations the goal long term is if we从一家小公司跳到更大的公司工作是非常难的。大公司往往更讲政治、更不讲功绩,它们更稳定,但创新更少。长期目标是:如果我们
2:55:43are all wealthy is that we're all working for ourselves and the people who are working for us are essentially robots and today that's software robots in data centers executing code tomorrow it could be delivery BOTS flying BOTS mechanical bots that都富有了,那就是我们都在为自己工作,而为我们工作的人本质上是机器人。今天那是在数据中心执行代码的软件机器人,明天可能是送货机器人、飞行机器人、机械机器人,
2:55:57are carrying things around this goes back to this idea of the best relationships or peer relationships if there's someone above you then that's someone to learn from if you're not learning from them and improving then there shouldn't be anybody above在到处搬运东西。这又回到“最好的关系是平级关系”这个想法。如果有人在上面,那是一个可以学习的人;如果你没有从他们身上学到东西、没有进步,那就不该有人在你上面。
2:56:09you if there's somebody below you it's because you're teaching them and enabling them if you're not teaching them and enabling them then get a robot underneath you don't need a human being below you this is utopian and it's long ways如果有人在下面,那是因为你在教他们、赋能他们;如果你没有在教他们、赋能他们,那就在下面放个机器人,你不需要人类在你下面。这是乌托邦,而且离我们
2:56:21off but in the not-too-distant future anybody who wants to work for themselves will be able to work with themselves you may have to make other sacrifices you may have to take on more risk you may take on more accountability you还很远。但在不太遥远的未来,任何想为自己工作的人都将能与自己一起工作。你可能得做出其他牺牲,你可能得承担更多风险、更多 accountability,
2:56:34may have less steady income but more and more I think the younger generation is realizing that if they're gonna work for themselves in one of your tweets you listed out some of the things you should study like programming sales reading你的收入可能更不稳定。但我越来越觉得,年轻一代正在意识到这一点:如果他们要为自己工作……在你的一条推文里,你列出了一些应该学习的东西,比如编程、销售、阅读、
2:56:50writing arithmetic one of the items that ended up on the cutting room floor was that you should also study ethics I was originally going to put that out there as a concession to people who believe that making money is evil写作、算术。有一项被剪掉的,是你还应该学伦理。我原本打算把它放进去,作为对那些认为赚钱是邪恶的人的一种让步,
2:57:02and that the only way to make it is evil but then I realized Efex is not necessarily something you study it's something you think about and it's something you do every one of us has a personal moral code and where以及认为赚钱的唯一途径就是邪恶的人的一种让步。但后来我意识到,伦理并不一定是你去学的东西,它是你去思考的东西,也是你去践行的东西。我们每个人都有个人的道德准则,至于
2:57:15you got that moral code from is different for everybody it's not like I can point you to a textbook sure I could point to some Roman and Greek texts but that's not gonna suddenly make you ethical there's the golden rule你的道德准则来自哪里,每个人都不同。我不可能给你指一本教科书。当然,我可以指向一些罗马和希腊的文本,但那不会突然让你变得有道德。有黄金法则,
2:57:25right do unto others as you would have them do unto you or there's nothing Talib silver rule which is don't do unto others which you don't want them doing unto you once you've been in business long enough you will realize对吧:你希望别人怎样待你,你就怎样待别人。还有 Nassim Taleb 的“白银法则”:别人怎样待你会让你不舒服,你就不要那样待别人。当你在生意场上待得足够久,你就会意识到
2:57:36how much of business is about trust and it's about trust because you want a compound interest you want to be able to work for long periods of time with trustworthy people without having to reevaluate every discussion with that and we生意中有多少是关于信任的。之所以关于信任,是因为你想要复利:你想能和值得信任的人长期合作,而不必每次讨论都重新评估,
2:57:48think each time and without having to constantly look over your shoulder and so over time you gravitate towards working with certain kinds of people and similarly those people will gravitate towards working with other ethical quote unquote people so being ethical不必时刻提心吊胆。所以随着时间推移,你会自然倾向于和某几类人合作;同样,那些人也会倾向于和其他所谓“有道德”的人合作。所以讲道德
2:58:03turns out to be a selfish imperative you want to be ethical because it attracts the other long-term players in the network and then they want to do business with you and if you build a good enough reputation for being ethical其实是一种自私的必然选择。你想讲道德,因为它吸引网络里其他长期玩家,然后他们想跟你做生意。而如果你在有道德方面建立了足够好的声誉,
2:58:16eventually people will pay you just to do deals through you because you're the one who'll validate and ensure Neels by your presence because you wouldn't be involved with low-quality stuff so being ethical actually pays off in the long run but最终人们会付钱给你,只是为了通过你来做交易,因为你是那个能验证、能凭自己的在场为交易背书的人,因为你不会去碰低质量的东西。所以讲道德从长期看确实有回报。但
2:58:29it's the very long run in the short run being unethical pays off which is why so many people go for it it's a greedy algorithm but you can be ethical simply because you're long-term greedy and I can even outline a那是非常长期的。短期来看,不讲道德是有回报的,这就是为什么那么多人选择它——那是一种贪心算法。但你完全可以仅仅因为“长期贪婪”而讲道德。我甚至可以勾勒出
2:58:40framework for different parts of so-called ethics just based on the idea of long term selfishness for example you want to be honest because it leaves you with a clear mind you don't have two threads running in your head one is一个框架,解释所谓伦理的不同部分,全都基于长期自私这个理念。比如,你想诚实,因为它让你头脑清明。你脑子里不会同时跑两条线程:一条是
2:58:53the lies that you told it to keep track of and the other one is what you're saying you just have to think about one thing at a time so you have more energy to think about that thing so your clear你讲过的那些谎言要记住,另一条是你正在说的话。你只需要一次想一件事,于是你有更多精力去想那件事,所以你的头脑更
2:59:01thinker also by being honest you're rejecting the people who only want to hear the pretty lies so you forced those people out of your network and sometimes it's painful like friends and family but long-term you create room for the people清晰。而且,诚实也意味着你排斥了那些只想听漂亮谎言的人,你把这些人都清出了你的圈子。有时候这会很痛,比如朋友和家人,但长期来看,你为那些
2:59:12who like you exactly the way that you are so that is a selfish reason to be honest for example in negotiations if you're the kind of person who always tries to get the best deal for yourself you will win a喜欢你原本样子的人腾出了空间。所以这是一个自私的诚实理由。比如在谈判中,如果你是那种总是想为自己争取最好条件的人,你会赢下
2:59:26lot of very early deals and it'll feel very good but on the other hand there are a few people who will recognize that you're always scrabbling and not acting fairly and they will tend to avoid you over time those people很多非常早期的交易,感觉非常好。但另一方面,会有少数人看出你总是在争抢、行事不公,随着时间他们会倾向于避开你。那些人
2:59:39end up being the deal makers in the network because people go to them for a fair shake or to figure out what's fair and so if you are cutting people fair deals you don't get paid in the short term but最终会成为网络里的交易撮合者,因为人们去找他们求一个公平对待,或者搞清楚什么是公平。所以如果你给别人公平的交易,短期你赚不到,但
2:59:49in the long term everybody wants to deal with you and you end up being a market hub you have more information you have trust you have reputation and people end up doing deals through you a lot of wisdom is just长期来看,所有人都想跟你做生意,你最终会成为一个市场枢纽:你有更多信息、有信任、有声誉,人们最终都通过你来做交易。很多智慧其实就是
2:59:59realized in the long-term consequences of your actions and so the longer term you're willing to look the wiser that you're going to seem to everybody around you do you want to tell us about some of the jobs that you had体现在你行为的长期后果里。所以你愿意看得越长远,在周围所有人眼里你就显得越有智慧。你愿意跟我们讲讲你年轻时做过的一些工作吗?
3:00:11as a youth and the specific job that kicked off your fanatical obsession with creating wealth this gets a little personal and I don't want to do the humble brag thing there was some thread going around Twitter about like name five以及那份具体点燃了你对创造财富狂热执念的工作。这有点私人了,我不想玩谦虚炫耀那一套。Twitter 上有个帖子在传,说列举五份
3:00:25jobs you've held and every rich person on there was trying to signal how they were held like normal jobs so I don't want to play that game I've held a bunch of menial jobs there people have worse than me people你做过的工作,然后上面每个富人都试图显示自己做过普通工作。所以我不想玩那个游戏。我做过一堆杂活,有人比我更惨,也有人
3:00:36who had it better than me there was one point where I was washing dishes in the school cafeteria and I said F this I hate this I can't do this anymore and I sweet-talk my way to a computer science prof比我过得好。有一个阶段我在学校食堂洗盘子,我说去他妈的,我讨厌这个,我再也干不下去了。于是我靠嘴甜说服了一位计算机科学教授,
3:00:47of helping ta his CS class in algorithms when I myself was completely unqualified for that and so it forced me to learn computer science algorithm so I could ta the rest of the course but that desire came out of the让我去帮他带计算机科学课的算法助教——而我自己当时完全不够格。这就逼着我去学计算机科学的算法,这样我才能带完这门课。但那份渴望来自
3:01:00suffering of Washington dishes in the college cafeteria which is not to say there's anything wrong with that there's nothing wrong with anything really but it was just not for me I did not enjoy it I had an active mind and在大学食堂洗盘子的痛苦。这不是说那有什么问题,其实任何事都没什么问题,只是那不适合我。我不享受它。我脑子很活跃,
3:01:11I wanted to make my money and earn my living through mental activities not through physical activities but sometimes it takes the suffering of doing the wrong thing to motivate you enough to do the right thing I worked at a law我想通过脑力活动而不是体力活动来赚钱谋生。但有时候,正是做错事带来的痛苦,才能给你足够的动力去做对的事。我在一家律所
3:01:23firm for a while a big prestigious law firm in New York City I had a big internship there and I basically got fired for surfing using that back in the day this is before the internet was a big thing using工作过一段时间,纽约一家很有声望的大律所。我在那里做过一个很重要的实习,结果基本上是因为上网逛论坛被开除了。那还是早年,互联网还没成大气候,用的是
3:01:33that was the newsgroups and it was the only way for me to stay from being completely bored and I was an overpaid guy wearing a tie in a suit and had to hang out in the conference room when the lawyers新闻组(newsgroups),那是我唯一能让自己不至于彻底无聊的办法。我当时是个拿钱过多的家伙,打着领带、穿着西装,律师们需要复印的时候
3:01:43needed photocopies I would make photocopies and the meantime I would be bored out of my skull this is pre iPhone thank God to Steve Jobs for saving us all from unending boredom but I used to read the Wall Street Journal我就得在会议室里待着、复印文件,与此同时我无聊到极点。那是 iPhone 之前的时代——感谢上帝,也感谢 Steve Jobs 把我们从无尽的无聊中拯救出来。那时我常常读《华尔街日报》,
3:01:53or anything that I could get my hands on I would have read the back of a brochure just to keep from going insane because listening to a bunch of corporate lawyers discuss how to optimize my new details in a big或者任何我能拿到的东西。为了不让自己发疯,我连宣传册的背面都会读,因为听一群公司律师讨论如何优化一份大合同里的细微条款
3:02:04contract is really dull and they got mad at me because they wanted me to sit there quietly and not read The Wall Street Journal they said that's rude that's misbehavior so I got called up and reprimanded a bunch of times真的很枯燥。他们生我的气,因为他们想让我安静地坐在那儿、不许读《华尔街日报》。他们说那很无礼,那是行为不当。所以我被叫去训了好几次,
3:02:14and then I was finally terminated and I was sent home in shame early from my very prestigious internship destroying my chance of going to law school that I was unhappy for all of an hour but ultimately it's one of the最后终于被解雇了,从我那段极其光鲜的实习中被耻辱地提前送回家,也毁掉了我上法学院的机会。我不高兴了整整一个小时,但归根到底,那是我人生中
3:02:27best things that ever happened to me because then I would have ended up as a lawyer not that I have anything against lawyers but it's not what I was meant to do you mentioned the catering job that you had a发生过的最好的事之一,因为否则我最终会成为一名律师——不是说我对律师有什么意见,但那不是我被注定要做的事。你提到过你以前那份餐饮服务的工作,
3:02:36while back that really kicked off the whole obsession that was an Envy thing when I was in high school I had to make some money to pay for my first semester at college and I had to get a job it那才是真正点燃这整份执念的事——那是出于嫉妒。我上高中时,得赚点钱付大学第一学期的费用,我必须找份工作。那
3:02:48was a summer of 19 90 1991 timeframe so this was the bush senior recession if anyone who's alive back then remembers it was actually really hard to get a job so I ended up working for an Indian food catering company是 1990、1991 年前后的夏天,正好是老布什时期的衰退。那会儿还活着的人应该记得,当时找工作真的非常难。所以我最后去了一家印度菜餐饮公司打工,
3:03:02and I ended up having to serve at a birthday party for a kid who it was actually in my school so I saw my classmates and I was out there serving food and drinks to them and that was incredibly embarrassing结果被派去一个小孩的生日派对上服务——那孩子其实跟我同校,所以我看到了我的同学们,而我在那儿给他们端菜送饮料。那真是极其难堪,
3:03:13I wanted to hide away and die right there but you know what it's all part of the plan it's all part of the motivation if I hadn't had that happened I probably wouldn't be as motivated and I wouldn't be as我恨不得躲起来当场死掉。但你知道吗,这一切都是计划的一部分,都是动力的一部分。如果没发生过那件事,我大概不会那么有动力,也不会那么
3:03:22successful so it's all fine but it was definitely a very strong motivator in that sense envy can be useful and we can also eat you alive if you let it follow you your entire life but there are points in your成功。所以都没问题,但在那个意义上它绝对是一个非常强的动力源。嫉妒可以有用,但如果你让它跟随你一辈子,它也能把你活活吃掉。但在你人生的某些
3:03:34life where it can be a very powerful booster rocket we spoke earlier about picking a business model that has leverage from scale economies Network effects zero marginal cost of replication there were a few other ideas on the cutting room floor时刻,它可以成为一枚非常强大的助推火箭。我们前面讲过选择一种能获得 leverage 的商业模式:规模经济、网络效应、零边际复制成本。还有几个被剪掉的想法,
3:03:49that I want to go through with you the first one was the principal-agent problem so mental models are all the rage everyone's trying to become smarter by adopting mental models I think mental models are interesting but I don't think explicitly我想跟你过一遍。第一个是委托—代理问题。现在心智模型非常流行,人人都想通过采用心智模型变得更聪明。我觉得心智模型很有趣,但我不认为要明确地
3:04:03in terms of a mental model checklists I know Charlie Munger does but that's just not how I think instead I tend to focus on the few lessons that I've learned in life over and over that I think are incredibly important把它当成心智模型清单来用——我知道 Charlie Munger 是那样做的,但那不是我的思维方式。我倾向于专注于我在人生中反复学到的少数几课,我认为它们极其重要,
3:04:13and seem to apply almost universally one that keeps coming up from microeconomics because as we've established macroeconomics is not really worth spending time on is what's called the principal agent problem principal in this case is principal with the P al而且似乎几乎普遍适用。一个从微观经济学里反复出现的——因为我们已经说过,宏观经济学其实不值得花时间——叫做委托—代理问题(principal-agent problem)。这里的 principal 是 p-r-i-n-c-i-p-a-l
3:04:28not ple so it's not a principle that you follow it's a principle who is a person a principal is an owner and an agent is the person who works for the owner so you can think of it as an employee而不是 principle。所以它不是你要遵循的“原则”,而是一个“委托人”,是一个人。委托人是所有者,代理人是为所有者工作的人,所以你可以把它想成雇员。
3:04:39the difference being a founder an employee I can summarize this by a famous quote that either was said by Napoleon or by Julius Caesar it's generally attributed to either one but he said if you want it done then go if区别就在于创始人和雇员。我可以用一句名言来总结,这句话要么是拿破仑说的,要么是尤利乌斯·凯撒说的,通常归于其中一位:如果你想完成它,就自己去;
3:04:53not then send which is saying if you want to do something right do it yourself because other people just don't care enough now the principal-agent problem sub everywhere in microeconomics the way that they try to characterize it is that the如果不想,就派人去。意思是:如果你想把某件事做对,就自己做,因为别人根本不够在乎。委托—代理问题在微观经济学里无处不在。他们试图描述它的方式是:
3:05:08principles incentives are different than the agents incentives so the owner of the business wants what is best for the business and will make the most money the agent generally wants whatever will look good to the principal or might make them委托人的激励和代理人的激励不同。企业所有者想要对企业最好的、能赚最多钱的东西;而代理人通常想要任何能让委托人对他们印象好的东西,或者能让他们
3:05:22the most friends in the neighborhood or in the business or might make them personally the most money you see this a lot with hired gun CEOs running public companies where the ownership of the public company is distributed so widely that在圈子或公司里交到最多朋友的东西,或者能让他们个人赚最多钱的东西。你在那些掌管上市公司的“雇佣兵型”CEO 身上经常看到这一点:上市公司的股权分布得如此之广,
3:05:34there's no principle remaining so nobody owns more than 1% of the company the CEO takes charge stuffs the board with their buddies and then starts issuing themselves low price stock options or doing a lot of stock buybacks because their compensation以至于没有委托人剩下了——没人持有公司超过 1% 的股份。CEO 掌权,把董事会塞满自己的哥们,然后开始给自己发低价股票期权,或者大量回购股票,因为他们的薪酬
3:05:47is based directly tied to the stock price so agents have a way of hacking systems this is what make incentive design so difficult as Charlie Munger says if you can be working on incentives don't work on anything else almost all直接与股价挂钩。所以代理人总有办法黑进系统。这就是为什么激励设计如此困难。正如 Charlie Munger 说的:如果你能研究激励,就别研究别的了。几乎所有
3:06:01human behavior can be explained by incentives the study of signaling and signals is seeing what people do despite what they say people are much more honest with their actions and they are with their words you have to get the incentives人类行为都能用激励来解释。研究信号传递,就是看人们做什么,而不是听他们说什么。人们的行动比言语诚实得多。你必须把激励
3:06:13right to get people to behave correctly it's a very difficult problem because the good people aren't purely coin-operated they're not just looking for money they're also looking for other things like status or meaning in what they do principal-agent problem is设计对,才能让人做出正确的行为。这是个非常难的问题,因为优秀的人并不是纯投币驱动的,他们不只是在找钱,他们还在寻找别的东西,比如地位,或者所做之事的意义。委托—代理问题是
3:06:27the one that as a business owner you're always going to be trying to figure out how do I make this person think like me how do i incent them how do I give them founder mentality and I think you have那种你作为企业主永远在琢磨的问题:我怎么让这个人像我一样思考?我怎么激励他?我怎么给他创始人思维?而且我觉得你必
3:06:38to truly have been a founder to fully appreciate how important this founder mentality thing is and what a difficult and gnarly problem the principal-agent problem is what I would say to you is if you are a principal you essentially want须真正当过创始人才会充分理解“创始人思维”这件事有多重要,以及委托—代理问题是个多么困难、多么棘手的问题。我要跟你说的是:如果你是委托人,你本质上就想要
3:06:52to spend a lot of your time thinking about this problem what that means is you want to take your top lieutenants and you want to be very generous with them in terms of ownership and incentives even if they don't necessarily花大量时间思考这个问题。这意味着,你要对你最核心的几位干将非常慷慨,在股权和激励上,即便他们不一定
3:07:03realize it because over time they will and you want them to be aligned with you in how they operate when you do business deals it's better to have an aligned partnership where you both have the same as then a partnership意识到这一点,因为随着时间他们会明白。你希望他们在运作方式上跟你一致。当你做商业交易时,与其得到一个在谈判中占了上风的合伙关系,
3:07:17where you got the advantage in the deal you negotiate in such a way that you've got the better end of the transaction because eventually the other person will figure it out or they'll be misaligned and the partnership will fall apart不如得到一个利益一致的合伙关系,双方拿到相同的东西。如果你谈判谈得让自己占了交易的上风,因为最终对方会看明白,或者他们会与你利益不一致,合伙关系就会崩掉。
3:07:28either way it's not going to be one of those things that you can invest into with the benefits of compound interest over decades finally if you're in a current role where you're an agent you're an employee your most important job无论哪种情况,它都不会成为那种你能投入几十年、享受复利好处的关系。最后,如果你现在的角色是代理人、是雇员,你最重要的工作
3:07:40is to think like a principal the more you can think like a principal the better off you're going to be long term because it's training you how to be a principal long-term and eventually you will become a principal it's also就是像委托人一样思考。你越能像委托人一样思考,长期来看你就越有利,因为这是在训练你如何长期做一个委托人,最终你会成为委托人。这也会
3:07:52going to align you with the principal and a good principal will then promote you or empower you or give you accountability or leverage way out of proportion to what might be your menial role I'm always very impressed by founders who让你与委托人保持一致,而一个好的委托人会提拔你、授权给你,或者给你 accountability 和 leverage,远超你那个小角色本该得到的。我总是非常敬佩那些
3:08:07will promote up very very young people through the ranks having them skip multiple levels despite their experience and invariably it happens because this agent who's way deep down things like a principal so if you can hack your way through the会把非常非常年轻的人一路提拔上来的创始人,让他们跳过好几个级别,不管他们的经验如何。而这无一例外是因为这个处在很底层的代理人像个委托人一样思考。所以如果你能破解
3:08:21principal agent problem you probably solved half of what it takes to run a company the reason I asked about this one first is because I feel like I personally never see the principal agent problem in my work I tend to委托—代理问题,你大概就解决了经营一家公司所需的一半。我先问这一个,是因为我感觉自己工作中从来见不到委托—代理问题。我倾向于
3:08:35work in small teams where everybody is highly economically aligned and the people have been filtered for a commitment to the mission and everybody else who doesn't work out moves on to another role elsewhere these are all heuristics that you have在小团队里工作,每个人都高度经济一致,而且人都经过筛选、对使命有承诺;其他不合适的人就转到别处去了。这些都是你
3:08:55designed to avoid having to deal with the single biggest problem in management another example of a heuristic you can have that helps you route around the principal agent problem is they deal with the smallest firms possible so for example when设计出来、用来避免处理管理中最大单一问题的启发式方法。另一个能帮你绕开委托—代理问题的启发式方法的例子是:尽可能跟最小的公司打交道。比如当
3:09:08I'm hiring a lawyer or a banker or even accountant to work on my deals one of the things that have become very cognizant about is the bigger firms all other things equal are generally worse yes they have more experience yes我雇律师、银行家甚至会计师来处理我的交易时,我越来越意识到的一件事是:其他条件相同的情况下,更大的公司通常更差。是的,他们有更多经验,是的,
3:09:22they have more people yes they have a bigger brand but what you'll find is that the principal and the age our highly separated and very often the principal will sell you and convince you to work with a firm but then他们有更多人,是的,他们有更大的品牌。但你会发现,委托人和代理人高度分离,而且往往是委托人向你推销、说服你跟这家公司合作,但之后
3:09:35all the work will be done by an agent who simply doesn't care as much and you can end up getting substandard service so I prefer to work with boutiques and my ideal law firm to work with is a law firm所有的工作都会由一个根本没那么在乎的代理人来做,结果你可能得到不达标准的服务。所以我更喜欢跟精品小机构合作。我理想中的律所是一家
3:09:47of one my ideal banker to work with is a solo banker now you're making other sacrifices and trade-offs in terms of that person's resources and you are betting big in that person but you've got one throat to choke there's no只有一个人的律所;我理想的银行家是一个单干的银行家。当然,你要在那个人的资源等方面做出其他牺牲和取舍,你是在这个人身上押重注,但你只有一个脖子可以掐——没有
3:10:00one else to point fingers to there's nowhere to run the accountability is extremely high if you're an agent the best way to operate is just say what wouldn't the founder do if you think like the owner and you act like别人可以甩锅,无处可逃,accountability 极高。如果你是代理人,最好的运作方式就是问:创始人不会怎么做?如果你像所有者一样思考、像所有者一样行动,
3:10:13the order it's only a matter of time until you become the owner let's chat about the Kelly criterion the Kelly criterion is a very popular as mathematical formulation of a simple concept and a simple concept is don't risk everything stay那你成为所有者只是时间问题。我们聊聊凯利准则。凯利准则是把一个简单概念做成的非常流行的数学表达,那个简单概念就是:不要孤注一掷,不要
3:10:32out of jail don't bet everything on one big gamble just be very careful how much you bet each time so you don't lose the whole kitty the Kelly criterion mathematically formulates if you're a gambler even when you have an edge进监狱,不要把所有东西押在一场大赌上,每次下注多少要非常小心,这样才不会输掉整个资金池。凯利准则在数学上给出了:如果你是个赌徒,即便你有优势,
3:10:45how much should you gamble per hand because even when you have an edge you can still lose so let's say you're a 51/49 edge every gambler knows not to bet the whole kitty on that 5149 edge because you could just每手该赌多少,因为即便你有优势,你仍然可能输。假设你有 51 比 49 的优势,每个赌徒都知道不能把整个资金池押在这个 51/49 的优势上,因为你可能就
3:10:56lose everything and you don't get to come back to the average Nassim Taleb famously talks about organdy City which is a fancy word for the simple concept that what is true for a hundred people on average isn't the same as全输光,而你没有机会回到平均值。Nassim Taleb 著名地谈到遍历性(ergodicity),那是个花哨的词,说的简单概念是:对一百个人平均成立的事,并不等于
3:11:09one person averaging that same thing a hundred times the easiest way to see that is by playing Russian roulette six people who play Russian roulette once each and then each winner gets a billion dollars one person ends up dead five一个人把同一件事平均做一百次。最容易看清这一点的方式是玩俄罗斯轮盘:六个人各玩一次俄罗斯轮盘,然后每个赢家拿十亿美元——一个人死了,五个人
3:11:22people have a billion dollars versus one person who plays Russian roulette with the same one gun six times is never gonna end up a billion or is gonna end up worth zero and so risk taking especially when the averages are拿到十亿美元;对比一个人用同一把枪玩六次俄罗斯轮盘——他永远不会成为亿万富翁,只会归零。所以承担风险,尤其当平均值是
3:11:34calculated across large populations is not always rational the Kelly criterion helps you avoid ruin the number one way in which people get ruined and modern business is not by betting too much but it's by cutting corners and doing unethical things在大人群上算出来的时候,并不总是理性的。凯利准则帮你避免毁灭。现代商业中人们被毁掉的头号方式不是赌得太大,而是偷工减料、做不道德的事,
3:11:50or downright illegal things ending up in an orange jumpsuit in prison or having a reputation ruined is the same as getting wiped to zero so never do those things let's talk about the shelling point is a game theory concept made或者干脆做违法的事,最后穿着橙色囚服进监狱;或者声誉被毁,这跟清零是一样的。所以永远不要做那些事。我们来谈谈谢林点。它是一个博弈论概念,
3:12:04famous by Thomas Schelling in the book called strategy of conflict which I do recommend reading it's about multiplayer games where other people are responding based on what they think your response is what he came up with was the mathematical formalization由 Thomas Schelling 在《冲突的策略》一书中提出的,我确实推荐读一读。它讲的是多人博弈,其他人的反应基于他们认为你会怎么反应。他提出的是数学形式化:
3:12:17of how do you get people who cannot communicate with each other to coordinate suppose that I want to meet with you but I don't tell you where and I don't tell you when we both want to meet but we cannot如何让无法彼此沟通的人协调起来。假设我想跟你见面,但我不告诉你地点,也不告诉你时间;我们都想见面,但无法
3:12:30communicate anymore information to each other that would sound like an impossible problem to solve we're done we can't do it not quite because I know that you're a rational person and smart and educated and you know I'm a rational person再向对方传递任何信息。这听起来像是个不可能解决的问题——完了,我们做不到。也不尽然,因为我知道你是个理性、聪明、受过教育的人,而你也知道我是个理性的人,
3:12:42who's smart we're gonna start thinking if we have to pick an arbitrary date we're probably gonna pick new years and what time midnight or 12:01 a.m. and where would we meet what is a big meeting point well if we're Americans也很聪明。我们就会开始想:如果必须选一个随意的日期,我们大概会选新年;什么时间?午夜,或者凌晨 12:01;在哪见面?什么是最主要的会面地点?如果我们都是美国人,
3:12:54is probably in New York City it's the most important city then we're in New York City will be meet at midnight probably Grand Central Station under the clock maybe you end up at the Empire State Building but not likely you那大概是在纽约市,那是美国最重要的城市;那就在纽约市,午夜见面,大概在中央车站的大钟下面;也许你会想到帝国大厦,但不太可能。你
3:13:06can just use social norms to converge onto a shelling point there are many times in many games where you can look at the game itself whether it's business or art or politics and you can find the converging shelling point within可以直接利用社会规范收敛到一个谢林点上。在很多博弈的很多时刻,你可以观察博弈本身——无论是商业、艺术还是政治——并在那个博弈的语境里找到收敛的谢林点。
3:13:18the context of that game you can cooperate with the other person here's a simple example let's suppose that you have two companies that are competing heavily with each other and they hold an oligopoly let's say that they're competing right now这样你就能跟对方合作。举个简单的例子:假设你有两家互相激烈竞争的公司,它们构成一个寡头垄断。假设它们现在正在竞争,
3:13:30and the price fluctuates between 8 bucks and 12 bucks for whatever the service is don't be surprised if they both converge on 10 bucks without ever talking to each other do you want to talk about Pereiro optimal Pareto optimal is某项服务的价格在 8 美元到 12 美元之间波动。如果它们在从未交谈的情况下都收敛到 10 美元,你不用惊讶。你想聊聊帕累托最优吗?帕累托最优是
3:13:44another concept from game theory along with Pareto superior means that something is better in some ways while being equal or better in the other ways it's not worse off in anyway this is an important concept when you're negotiating with somebody另一个博弈论概念,还有帕累托改进,意思是在某些方面更好,而在其他方面持平或也更好,任何方面都没有变差。当你跟别人谈判时,这是个重要概念。
3:14:00if you can make a solution Pareto superior to where it was before you will always do that Pareto optimal is when the solution is the best that it can possibly be then you can't change it without making it worse in如果你能做出一个比之前帕累托更优的方案,你总会那么做。帕累托最优是指方案已经达到它可能的最好状态,这时你任何改动都会让至少
3:14:14at least one dimension there is a hard trade-off from this point forward these are important concepts to understand when you're involved in a big negotiation in negotiation though I would generally say that this is a tweet that I have negotiations一个维度变差——从这一点往后就是硬性取舍了。当你参与一场重大谈判时,这些都是要理解的重要概念。不过关于谈判,我一般会说——这是我的一条推文——谈判
3:14:26are won by whoever cares less negotiation at the end of the day is about not wanting it too badly if you want something too badly then the other person will be able to extract more price from it if you do是由在乎更少的那个人赢的。说到底,谈判就是关于不要想要得太厉害。如果你太想要某样东西,对方就能从中榨取更高的价格。如果你确实
3:14:39care more about something than the other person and they are taking advantage of you in a negotiation then your best way to deal with that is to turn it from a short-term game into a long-term game try to make it比对方更在乎某件事,而他们在谈判中利用这一点占你便宜,那你最好的应对方式就是把它从短期博弈变成长期博弈。试着把它
3:14:51into a repeat game try to bring reputation into line try to bring other people in who may have a say in the future or may want to play games of this person in the future an example of a very high变成一个重复博弈,试着把声誉带进来,试着引入其他未来可能有话语权、或者未来可能想跟这个人打交道的人。一个成本非常高、
3:15:02cost low information single move game is having your house renovated contractors are notorious for over booking ripping people off being unaccountable I'm sure contractors have their own side of it the homeowner has unreasonable demands we found problems the homeowner doesn't信息很低、单次博弈的例子,就是装修你的房子。承包商出了名地超量接活、宰客、不负责任。我肯定承包商也有他们自己那一面:房主要求不合理、我们发现有问题、房主不肯
3:15:18want to pay for it they don't understand there are low information buyers it's a very expensive transaction historically it's been very hard to find good contractors and the contractor is no choice on what a good homeowner is you try to付钱、他们不懂。这是信息不足的买家,这是一笔非常昂贵的交易,历来就很难找到好的承包商,而承包商对“什么是好房主”也没得挑。你会试着
3:15:30go through friends you try to go through reputation and what you're basically doing there is you're trying to convert a single move expensive game with a high probability of cheating on both sides into a multi move game one way to通过朋友介绍、通过声誉去找。你本质上在做的是:试图把一场双方都有很高欺骗概率的、昂贵的单次博弈,变成一场多次博弈。一种方式是
3:15:43do that say well actually I need two different projects done so the first project we'll do together and then based on that I'll decide if we do the second project you can split your work up into two projects another way说:其实我有两个不同的项目要做,我们先一起做第一个,然后根据结果我再决定要不要做第二个。你可以把工作拆成两个项目。另一种方式
3:15:54might be I'm gonna do this project with you and then I have three friends who want projects done and they're waiting to see the outcome of these projects another one might be the same person operating within the same community and可能是:我先跟你做这个项目,然后我有三个朋友也想做项目,他们在等着看这些项目的结果。还有一种可能是:同一个人在同一个社群里经营,
3:16:04having a reputation in the community to protect another one could be you write them a yelp or a thumbtack review these are all ways of turning a single move game into a longer-term game and helping get past a position of在社群里有一份声誉要保护。还有一种是你给他们写一条 Yelp 或 Thumbtack 评价。这些都是把单次博弈变成更长期博弈的方式,帮你摆脱
3:16:17poor negotiating leverage and poor information we talked about compounding and compounding interest but we didn't really dig into it that much relationships are a good example of compound interest once you've been in a good relationship with somebody for a while谈判筹码不足、信息不足的处境。我们谈过复利和复利效应,但没有真正深入。关系就是复利的一个好例子。一旦你跟某人维持了一段良好的关系,
3:16:32whether it's business or its romantic life gets a lot easier because you know that person's got your back you don't have to keep questioning if I'm doing a deal with someone that I've dealt with for 20 years and I trust不管是商业关系还是感情关系,事情都会容易得多,因为你知道那个人会挺你,你不必不停地质疑。如果我跟一个已经打了 20 年交道的人做交易,我信任
3:16:43them and they trust me we don't have to read the legal contracts maybe don't even need to create legal contracts maybe we can actually do it on handshakes that kind of trust makes it very very easy to do business if他,他也信任我,我们都不必读法律合同,也许甚至不需要起草法律合同,也许我们真的可以握手成交。那种信任让做生意变得非常非常容易。
3:16:54nivi and I start another company I know that if things aren't working out we're both gonna be extremely reasonable about how to go about it how to exit out of it how to shut it down or even if we're scaling如果 Nivi 和我再创办一家公司,我知道如果事情不顺,我们俩都会极其理性地处理:怎么推进、怎么退出、怎么关掉,甚至在我们扩张的时候
3:17:06and how to bring in new people at this point we have mutual trust and that allows us to start businesses more easily and almost compounds the effect especially when you're dealing with something like a startup which is so difficult to怎么引入新人。在这一点上我们有相互信任,这让我们更容易启动生意,几乎是在复利地放大效果,尤其当你面对的是创业公司这种如此难以
3:17:17pull off removing these frictional mechanisms can actually often be the difference between success and failure I think the number one most under-recognized reason startups fail is because the founders fall apart there's a couple non-intuitive things about compounding the first one做成的事情时。去掉这些摩擦机制,往往就是成功与失败的差别。我认为创业公司失败的头号、最被低估的原因,就是创始人之间散伙了。关于复利,有几件不太直觉的事。第一件
3:17:36is that most of the benefits of compounding comes at the end of the compounding so you may not necessarily see the huge benefits of it upfront there was a good quote from an article that Sam Altman wrote where he said是:复利的大部分好处都出现在复利的末尾,所以你不一定能在前期看到它巨大的好处。Sam Altman 写过一篇文章,里面有一句很好的话,他说:
3:17:50I always want it to be a project that if successful will make the rest of my career look like a footnote again that just goes back to the idea that most of the benefits of compounding come at the end the我总是希望它是一个项目——如果成功,会让我余下的职业生涯看起来只像个脚注。这又回到了那个观点:复利的大部分好处都出现在最后。
3:18:03other thing that's a little non-intuitive about compounding is that I think it's better to have a few deep compounding relationships with people instead of a large amount of non compounding relationships one of the under realized things in business is that关于复利另一件不太直觉的事是:我觉得跟人拥有几段深厚的、能复利的关系,比拥有大量不能复利的关系要好。商业中一件被低估的事是:
3:18:19it takes just as much effort to create a small business as it does to create a large business whether you're Elon Musk or whether you're the guy running three Italian restaurants in town you're working 80 hours a week you're sweating创建一家小企业和创建一家大企业,所花的努力是一样的。不管你是 Elon Musk,还是镇上开三家意大利餐厅的那个人,你都是一周工作 80 小时,都在
3:18:30bullets you're hiring and firing people you're trying to balance the books it's highly stressful and it takes years and years of your life but in one case you get companies that are worth 50 hundred billion dollars and the adulation of汗流浃背,都在招人开人,都在努力把账做平,压力极大,都要花掉你一年又一年的生命。但在一种情况下,你得到的公司价值五百亿、上千亿美元,还得到
3:18:42everybody and the other hand you might make a little bit of money and you've got some nice restaurants so think big are there any other micro economic concepts outside of zero marginal cost of replication and scale economies that are important所有人的追捧;另一种情况下,你可能只赚了一点钱,有了几家不错的餐厅。所以,要敢想大。除了零边际复制成本和规模经济,还有其他重要的微观经济学概念
3:18:58for people to understand price discrimination is an important thing to understand that what it means is that you can charge people different things based on their propensity to pay now you're not allowed different people different things just because you don't值得人们理解吗?价格歧视是个重要的概念,它的意思是:你可以根据人们付钱的意愿,对不同人收不同的价。当然,你不能仅仅因为你不喜欢某些人,就对他们收不同的价,
3:19:12like them you have to offer them a little something extra but it has to be something that rich people care about business class seats will routinely cost five or ten times what an economy class seat does but it probably cost你必须给他们一点额外的东西,而且那必须是富人在乎的东西。商务舱座位通常要花经济舱的五到十倍价钱,但航空公司提供它大概只多花
3:19:24the airline just two maybe three acts to provide that it's just the rich person is more willing to pay so you have to give them the little things that they need extra to either signal they're rich or that little bit两三百美元的成本。只是因为富人更愿意付。所以你必须给他们需要的那点额外小东西,要么用来显示自己有钱,要么是那一点点
3:19:34of comfort that they want price discrimination gets used a lot in enterprise software where you have a freemium product the free version will do almost everything but then if you want the version that's a little extra secure or hosted on他们想要的舒适。价格歧视在企业软件里用得很多:你有免费增值产品,免费版几乎什么都能做,但如果你想要一个更安全一点、或者托管在
3:19:46your site or has multi-user administrations so the IT person can monitor everything that's going on you're suddenly find yourself paying 10 100 or infinite times as much as you go from a free product to a price product another good concept你自己服务器上、或者有多用户管理(让 IT 人员能监控所有情况)的版本,你会突然发现自己要付 10 倍、100 倍甚至无穷多倍的价钱,从免费产品跳到付费产品。另一个好概念
3:20:00is consumer surplus and producer surplus which is the excess value that somebody gets even though they were willing to pay more the product was priced the same for everybody I get a lot of joy out of my morning coffee obviously是消费者剩余和生产者剩余,即某人即使愿意付更多、却因为产品对所有人定价相同而获得的超额价值。显然,我从早晨的咖啡中获得很多快乐。
3:20:13I've made some money if my coffee cost $20 I would pay $20 my morning coffee but Starbucks doesn't know that it can't price the coffee $20 just for me because selling the exact same product so I'm getting a lot of我赚了些钱,如果我的咖啡要 20 美元,我也愿意为早晨那杯咖啡付 20 美元。但 Starbucks 并不知道这一点,它不能只对我一个人把咖啡定价 20 美元,因为它在卖完全相同的产品。所以我获得了大量
3:20:25consumer surplus out of the coffee and all businesses generate consumer surplus it's a good thing to keep in mind when someone's harping about how evil companies are Amazon might be a trillion dollar company but I will bet you they're generating消费者剩余。所有企业都在创造消费者剩余。当有人喋喋不休地说公司多邪恶时,记住这一点很有用。Amazon 也许是一家万亿美元公司,但我敢打赌,它正在创造
3:20:37trillions of dollars in consumer surplus through convenience and willingness to pay there are a lot of people who are willing to pay more than what Amazon charges them for all their services let's talk about NPV NPV is just the net数万亿美元的消费者剩余,通过便利性和人们的支付意愿。有很多人愿意为 Amazon 的所有服务付比它收取的更多的钱。我们谈谈 NPV。NPV 就是净
3:20:51present value of something it's when you say that stream of payments I'm gonna get in the future what is that worth today so a common example of this is you're joining a startup company and you're getting stock options and the现值。就是你说:我未来会收到的那一串付款,它今天值多少?一个常见的例子是:你加入一家创业公司,拿到股票期权,
3:21:04founder says well this company is going to be worth a billion dollars and I'm giving you Oh point one percent of the company therefore you're getting a million dollars with the stock what he's or she's arguing is what's gonna be创始人说:好,这家公司将来会值十亿美元,我给你公司 0.1% 的股份,所以你拿到的股票值一百万美元。他(或她)在论证的是未来会
3:21:15worth in the future you have to discount that back to today you have to figure out what is that worth today and you have to apply a discount rate or an interest rate that takes into account the massive risk the值多少。你必须把它折现回今天,你必须算出它今天值多少,而且你必须用一个折现率或利率,把创业公司面临的巨大风险
3:21:24startups face what you end up with is the price that it's worth today and that's the price at which a venture capitalist would invest in the company today so if that founder just raised around at ten million dollars and that考虑进去。你得出的就是它今天值的价格,那也是风险投资人今天愿意投资这家公司的价格。所以如果那位创始人刚以 1000 万美元估值融了一轮,而这家
3:21:36company's only worth 1% of what the founders arguing your million-dollar package is actually worth $10,000 so NPV calculations at a very rough level you should be very comfortable doing in your head what's a mispriced externality you mentioned that at some公司只值创始人所说价值的 1%,那你那个“百万美元”的股票包其实只值 1 万美元。所以净现值计算,至少粗略层面,你应该很能心算。什么是定价错误的外部性?你在某个
3:21:53point during our podcast and externalities when there is an additional cost that is imposed by whatever product is being produced or consumed that is not accounted for in the price of the product sometimes you can fix that by putting the时候提到过外部性。外部性是指,某种产品的生产或消费所强加的额外成本,没有被计入产品的价格。有时候你可以通过把那个
3:22:06price back into the product one of the most ardent ways people attack capitalism these days is that it's destroying the environment and if you throw away capitalism because destroying the environment then guess what we're all headed back to pre-industrial times成本重新计入产品价格来修正它。如今人们攻击资本主义最激烈的方式之一,是说它正在破坏环境。但如果你因为破坏环境就抛弃资本主义,那你猜怎么着——我们全都要回到前工业时代,
3:22:20there's not going to be a good thing so rather there is an externality because the environment is finite the environment is precious and we have to price it properly and fold it back in if people are wasting water or putting那可不是好事。所以,外部性确实存在——因为环境是有限的,环境是宝贵的,我们必须给它正确定价并把它折回价格里。如果人们在浪费水,或者把
3:22:33hydrocarbons in the atmosphere or polluting things you want to charge them what it costs to clean up that pollution return it to a pristine State perhaps that price has to be very very high if you raise that price high enough碳氢化合物排进大气、或者污染东西,你就想向他们收取清理这些污染、让环境恢复原状所需的成本。也许那个价格必须非常非常高。如果你把价格提得足够高,
3:22:45you knock out pollution it's much better than feel-good measures where we're just gonna ban plastic bags and we're gonna say don't take showers and Saturdays and Sundays when we're having a drought California likes to run declarations and ads to scare你就能消除污染。这比那些让人自我感觉良好的措施好得多——比如禁止塑料袋、说干旱期间周六周日不许洗澡。加州喜欢发布公告和广告来吓唬
3:22:58you into not taking showers and times when there's a drought when it would be just much better to raise the price of fresh water your average consumer might pay a few pennies more for a shower but then the almond farmers你,让你在干旱时期不要洗澡;而那时候,提高淡水价格会好得多。普通消费者洗个澡可能多付几美分,但那样杏仁种植者——
3:23:10who consume a lot of the water will cut back on using fresh water and almond farming may move to a part of the country where water is more abundant properly pricing externalities can save resources in a tremendous way it's a他们消耗大量水——就会减少使用淡水,杏仁种植可能会迁到全国水资源更丰富的地方。给外部性正确定价能以极大的方式节约资源。这是
3:23:22good framework to think about how to be effective when you want to do things like save the environment rather than feel-good things it won't actually amount to anything one of the most common questions we get from people is how do一个很好的框架,让你在想做拯救环境这类事时思考如何真正有效,而不是做那些自我感觉良好、实际毫无效果的事。我们最常被人问到的问题之一是:我怎
3:23:35I get the time to start investing in myself I have a job they'll take off the answer with one of the tweets from the cutting room floor where you said you will need to rent your time to get started this么才能腾出时间来开始投资自己?我还有一份工作。他们会用一条被剪掉的推文来回答这个问题,你说:你需要先把你的时间“租”出去,才能起步。
3:23:46is only acceptable when you are learning and saving preferably in a business for society does not yet know how to train people and apprenticeship is the only model you're gonna have to work starting out unless you happen to be born这只有在你同时在学习和积累(最好是储蓄)的时候才可以接受。在一门社会还不知道如何培训人才的生意里,学徒制是唯一的模式。除非你碰巧出生在
3:23:59rich in which case you probably won't have the motivation to make money in the first place if you're gonna do the work and join a business where apprenticeship matters you know Warren Buffett went and tried to work for Benjamin Graham's富裕家庭——那样的话你大概一开始就不会有赚钱的动力。如果你要做这件事,加入一门学徒制很重要的生意——你知道,Warren Buffett 曾去尝试为 Benjamin Graham 的
3:24:10River School to learn how to be a value investor and you offered to work for free and Ben Graham said you're overpriced it's true in that these apprenticeship businesses you're probably making a sacrifice in terms of short term career work公司工作,学习如何成为价值投资者;他提出免费工作,而 Ben Graham 说:你太贵了。确实如此。在这些学徒制生意里,你大概在短期职业发展上做出了牺牲,
3:24:23there but try to learn something where people haven't quite figured out how to teach it yet and that can happen if you're working in a field that is brand new and quickly expanding so no one has figured it out or但要努力去学那些人们还没完全搞清楚怎么教的东西。这可以发生在你身处一个全新且快速扩张的领域时——还没人搞清楚,或者
3:24:37it's a fuel that's very circumstantial where the details really matter and it's always moving for example fund investments or investing in general is one of those skills entrepreneurship is one of those skills one of the most coveted jobs that's come它是一门非常依赖具体情境的领域,细节非常关键,而且一直在变化。比如基金投资,或者一般意义上的投资,就是这样的技能;创业也是这样的技能。过去五年左右在硅谷
3:24:51up in Silicon Valley in the last half decade or so is being a chief of staff or an entrepreneur where the brightest young kids will follow the CEO or the entrepreneur around and do whatever that person needs them to do出现的最令人向往的工作之一,是当幕僚长,或者跟着创业者做事:最聪明的年轻人跟着 CEO 或创业者,做那个人需要他们做的任何事。
3:25:02and many cases there overqualified for the position you may have someone who has two graduate degrees who is essentially running the CEOs laundry for that day because that's the most important thing that needs to be done but at the same很多情况下他们的资历远超这个职位。你可能会看到某人有两个研究生学位,那天实质上是在帮 CEO 跑腿洗衣服,因为那是当天最需要做的事。但与此同时
3:25:14time they're also gonna be sitting in all the highest end staff meetings they're gonna be privy to all the venture fundraising decks and all the stress and drama theatrics innovation and knowledge that can only come from being Mexican entrepreneur because他们也坐在所有最高层的员工会议里,能接触到所有的融资路演材料,以及所有的压力、戏剧性、作秀、创新,和那些只有身处创业者身边才能获得的知识,因为
3:25:27the entrepreneur is willing to do anything and everything to make their company successful and the chief of staff was accompanying them and learning now obviously this is very Silicon Valley centric tech company advice if you are currently stuck in a创业者为了公司成功愿意做任何事。而幕僚长一路伴随他们、在旁学习。当然,这显然是非常硅谷中心的科技公司建议。如果你现在被困在一份
3:25:39normal job and you don't have the opportunity to learn in an apprenticeship model and you need to make money then go ahead and do that job but even within the context of that job try to be innovative sign up to普通工作里,没有机会以学徒模式学习,而你又需要赚钱,那就去做那份工作。但即便在那份工作的语境里,也试着创新,主动报名
3:25:51take on new challenges new responsibilities find the part of the job that has a steepest learning curve what you're really trying to avoid is repetitive drudgery doesn't serve anybody then you're essentially just counting the time until your job is automated承担新挑战、新责任,找出那份工作里学习曲线最陡的部分。你真正想避免的是重复性的苦差——它不服务于任何人,那时你本质上只是在数着时间等你的工作被自动化掉。
3:26:06it away even if you're a barista at the coffee shop try to figure out how to make connections with the customers try to figure out how to innovate on what you're offering them on your basic service and delight the customer即便你是咖啡店的咖啡师,也试着想办法与顾客建立连接,试着想办法在你能提供的基本服务上创新,让顾客惊喜。
3:26:18and what will happen is managers founders owners they notice the hardest thing for any founder is to find people who will work with them who have founder mentality this is a fancy way of saying they care enough and what most会发生的是:经理、创始人、老板都会注意到。对任何创始人来说,最难的事就是找到愿意跟他们一起工作、并且有创始人思维的人。这是一种花哨的说法,意思是他们足够在乎。而大多数
3:26:34people will say well I'm not the founder I'm not being paid enough to care actually you are the knowledge and the skills that you gain by having founder mentality set you up to be a founder down the line and it人会想:我又不是创始人,我拿的钱不够让我在乎。其实你就是。你通过拥有创始人思维所获得的知识和技能,会在将来让你成为创始人,
3:26:46pays you in that sense you can get a lot out of almost any position you just have to put a lot into it if I'm working a job and I want to figure out if I should get accountability judgments specific从这个意义上它就在付你报酬。你几乎能从任何职位中获得很多,你只需要投入很多。如果我在做一份工作,想搞清楚我该不该争取 accountability、判断力、specific
3:27:00knowledge leverage it sounds like you're saying the one thing to optimize for is specific knowledge out of all those things if you can judgment takes experience takes a lot of time to build up you have to put yourself in positionsknowledge、leverage——听起来你是在说,在所有这些东西里,最该优化的那一项是 specific knowledge?如果可以的话——判断力需要经验,需要大量时间积累,你必须把自己放到
3:27:14where you can exercise judgment that will come from taking on accountability leverage is something that society gives you much later once you've demonstrated your judgment unless you learn a code or you become good with media these are permissionless leverage kind能够运用判断力的位置上,而这来自承担 accountability。leverage 则是社会在你证明了判断力之后很久才会给你的东西,除非你学会写代码,或者你变得擅长媒体——那些是无需许可的 leverage,
3:27:29of comes later judgment comes later accountability you can take on immediately you can say hey I'll take charge of this thing that nobody wants to take charge Oh so accountability is where you can step up but then you're publicly putting那种来得晚一些。判断力来得晚一些。accountability 你可以立刻承担:你可以说,嘿,这件没人愿意负责的事我来负责。所以 accountability 是你可以马上站出来的地方,但然后你就公开把自己的
3:27:41your neck on the chopping block so you have to deliver specific knowledge gets built up by taking on accountability for things that other people don't know how to do and that perhaps you enjoy doing or you're naturally inclined towards doing脖子放上砧板,你必须交付。specific knowledge 是通过对别人不知道怎么做、而也许你喜欢做、或者天生倾向于做的事承担 accountability,逐步积累起来的。
3:27:54you can be working in a factory and it may turn out that the hardest thing in the factory is knowing how to raise capital to keep the factory running and that's what the owner of the factory is always stressed out你可能在一家工厂工作,结果发现工厂里最难的事,是懂得如何融资来让工厂继续运转。而这正是工厂老板一直压力山大的
3:28:05about and if you notice this and you're like I'm good at balancing my checkbook and a good head for numbers and I'm good at watching money but I haven't really raised money before you offer your help and become the owner事。如果你注意到这一点,然后想:我擅长对账、对数字有感觉、擅长看管钱,但我以前没真正融过资——那你就主动提供帮助,成为老板的
3:28:17sidekick in that regard you help solve their biggest problem you'll become the heir apparent early on find things where you have any interest and take on accountability don't worry about short-term compensation if you dive into the edge of knowledge which左右手。你帮他们解决最大的问题,你很早就会成为公认的接班人。找到任何你有兴趣的事,承担 accountability。不用担心短期报酬。如果你潜入知识的边缘,那里
3:28:32nobody knows how to solve and you solve the hard problems taking accountability people will line up behind you the leverage will come there were a couple other related tweets to this topic from the cutting room floor that I'll read up没人知道怎么解决,而你解决了那些难题、承担了 accountability,人们就会站在你身后排队,leverage 会随之而来。关于这个话题,还有几条被剪掉的相关推文,我来读一下。
3:28:45first the technology industry is a great place to acquire specific knowledge the frontier is always moving forward if you were genuinely intellectually curious you will acquire the knowledge ahead of others breo technologies around us everywhere the spoon was technology once第一条:科技行业是获得 specific knowledge 的绝佳场所,前沿永远在向前推进。如果你真的在智识上好奇,你就会比别人更早获得这些知识。我们周围到处都是技术:勺子曾经也是技术,
3:29:02fireless technology once but once we've figured out how to make it work it disappeared in the background became part of our everyday lives so technology is by definition the intellectual frontier it's taking the things that are recent from science or火也曾经是技术。但一旦我们搞清楚了怎么用它,它就退到背景里,成为我们日常生活的一部分。所以技术按定义就是智识的前沿:它把来自科学或
3:29:16from culture that we have not yet figured out how to mass-produce and it's pretty to know how to commercialize it how to make it available to everybody so technology will always be where you can pick up specific knowledge that is文化的新东西拿来——那些我们还没搞清楚如何量产的东西——而关键在于懂得如何把它商业化、如何让每个人都用上。所以技术永远是你能够获取 specific knowledge 的地方,那里有
3:29:28valuable society that doesn't quite understand for example if I become a world-class expert in machine learning just when machine learning is starting to take off and I got there through my genuine intellectual interest and I bet my career on it社会还不太理解的有价值的知识。比如,如果我在机器学习刚开始起飞时成为世界级的机器学习专家,而我是靠真正的智识兴趣走到那里、并把职业生涯押在上面,
3:29:40I'm gonna do really well but 20 years from now machine learning may be second hat there are also timeless forms of specific knowledge for example if you're good at persuading people it's probably a skill that you picked up early on我会做得非常好。但二十年后,机器学习可能就成了老生常谈。也有一些永恒的 specific knowledge 形式。比如,如果你擅长说服别人,那大概是你早年就获得的技能,
3:29:55in life it's always going to apply because persuading people is always going to be valuable this is one of those skills that's generic it probably alone is not enough to build a career on it needs to be combined a skill它在任何时候都适用,因为说服别人永远有价值。这是那种通用技能之一,光靠它大概不足以撑起一份职业,它需要被组合——组成一个技能
3:30:06stack you might combine persuasion with accounting combined with understanding for example semiconductor production lines and now all of a sudden you're the best semiconductor sales person that becomes the best semiconductor company CEO there are timeless specific knowledge skills those are堆栈。你可以把说服力与会计结合起来,再加上对半导体生产线之类的理解,然后突然之间,你就是最好的半导体销售员,进而成为最好的半导体公司 CEO。有一些永恒的 specific knowledge 技能,那些是
3:30:23skills I would say that can pretty much never be taught and then there are timely specific knowledge skills which come and go but even those tend to have fairly long shelf lives of decade or two decades or three decades so我认为几乎永远无法被教会的技能。然后也有一些时效性的 specific knowledge 技能,来了又去,但即便是那些,也往往有相当长的保质期,十年、二十年或三十年。
3:30:35technology is a good place to find those specific skillsets and if you can bring in a more generic specialized knowledge skill sets the other tweet from the cutting room floor was related to accountability in companies it said companies don't know所以科技是寻找这些 specific 技能组合的好地方;如果你能同时带入更通用的专业技能组合……另一条被剪掉的推文与公司里的 accountability 有关,它说:公司不知道
3:30:50how to measure output so they measure inputs instead work in a way that your outputs are visible and measurable if you don't have accountability do something different the entire structure of rewarding people comes from the agricultural and industrial age where如何衡量产出,所以它们转而衡量投入。用让你的产出可见、可衡量的方式去工作。如果你没有 accountability,就去做别的事。整个奖励人的结构来自农业和工业时代,那时
3:31:08your inputs and your outputs matched up very closely the amount of hours that you put into doing something was a good rough proxy for what kind of output you're going to get today it's extremely nonlinear one good investment decision can你的投入和产出非常紧密地对应:你在某件事上投入的小时数,是你将得到什么产出的很好的粗略代理指标。今天,它是极度非线性的。一个好的投资决策就能
3:31:22make a company 10 or 100 million dollars one good product feature can be difference between product market fit and complete failure so judgment and accountability matter much much more and you want the accountability because sometimes the best engineers or the让一家公司赚 1000 万或 1 亿美元;一个好的产品功能可以是 product market fit 与彻底失败之间的差别。所以判断力和 accountability 重要得多得多。而你想要 accountability,是因为有时候最好的工程师或者
3:31:38best salespeople are the ones who don't work very hard but then they'll ship that one critical product at just the right time or they'll make that one huge sale or that one huge deal that will make the company or at最好的销售恰恰是工作不那么拼命的人,但他们会在恰到好处的时间交付那一个关键产品,或者做成那一笔巨额销售、那一笔巨额交易,从而成就这家公司,或者至少
3:31:49least make the numbers for the quarter it's very important that people are able to tell that you had a role in that that doesn't mean that you stomp all over your team humans are extremely sensitive to people who take too让这个季度的数字达标。非常重要的是,人们能够看出你在其中起了作用。这不意味着你可以把团队踩在脚下。人类对抢太多
3:32:00much credit so you do want to be the kind of person that is always giving out credit but the smart people will know who was responsible there are jobs where you're not customer-facing enough where you're kind of a cog in功劳的人极其敏感。所以你确实想成为那种总是把功劳分出去的人,但聪明人会知道谁才是真正负责的人。有些工作,你不够面向客户,你有点像是机器里的
3:32:12a machine and you sacrifice accountability to some degree an example is when you're a consultant as a consultant often you're giving the best ideas and the best outcome but it's being delivered through some person who's working within the organization at一个齿轮,你在某种程度上牺牲了 accountability。一个例子是当顾问:作为顾问,你常常给出最好的想法和最好的结果,但它是通过组织内部某个人来交付的。到
3:32:27that point you may not have visibility to the top people in the organizations and you may be hidden behind a screen and that's just a trade-off that you're making in exchange for your independence and the consultant because you're not willing了那个地步,你可能接触不到组织高层的人,你可能被藏在一块幕布后面——这只是你为了换取独立性而做出的取舍。而顾问,正因为你不愿意
3:32:38to play the corporate rat race or the corporate ladder game realize that with accountability you can get a lot more credit when things go right of course the downside is you get hurt a lot more when things go wrong you玩企业里的老鼠赛跑、企业阶梯游戏,就要明白:有了 accountability,事情顺利时你能得到多得多的功劳;当然,代价是事情出错时你受到的伤害也大得多。
3:32:50stick your neck out you have to be willing to be blamed sacrifice and even attacked so if you're the kind of person that thrives in a high accountability environment you're naturally also going to end up very thick-skinned over time you're你把脖子伸出去,就必须愿意被指责、被牺牲,甚至被攻击。所以如果你是那种在高 accountability 环境里如鱼得水的人,随着时间你自然也会变得脸皮很厚。
3:33:04gonna get hurt a lot people gonna attack you if you fail if you're working a job I think you can apply a lot of the principles of the tweet storm inside the job like we just discussed including other ones like你会受很多伤,如果失败,人们会攻击你。如果你在做一份工作,我觉得你可以在工作内部应用这条推文串里的很多原则,就像我们刚才讨论的,还包括其他原则,比如
3:33:16partnering with rational optimists you can find people in the organization who are optimistic and rational that have energy integrity and intelligence and the flip side of this is that if you once you get some specific knowledge one way to scale与理性的乐观主义者结盟。你可以在组织里找到那些乐观又理性、有能量、有正直、有智慧的人。而它的另一面是:一旦你获得了一些 specific knowledge,规模化它的一种方式
3:33:31it is to start training apprentices that you can then outsource some of your tasks to for example I made a bunch of good investments and I figured out a little bit here and there about the venture business and I could就是开始培养学徒,然后把你的部分任务外包给他们。比如,我做了一些不错的投资,也零零碎碎摸清了风险投资这门生意的一些门道,我本可以
3:33:45keep doing that I could keep just investing as an investor but instead I co-founded this project called spearhead where we train up-and-coming young founders to also become angel and investors and we give them a checkbook an apprenticeship model they come继续那样做,继续只当一个投资人做投资。但我转而联合创办了一个叫 Spearhead 的项目,我们在里面培训崭露头角的年轻创始人,让他们也成为天使投资人和投资人。我们给他们一本支票簿,一种学徒模式:他们
3:33:59to us with specific deals of the looking at and we help them think through every unique situation and we basically apprentice them under us to learn the venture business and it's much more scalable we have classes and talks where we带着正在看的具体交易来找我们,我们帮他们逐一思考每个独特情况。我们基本上是把他们放在我们下面当学徒,学习风投这门生意。这样可扩展性强得多。我们有课程和讲座,
3:34:12have tell them what we know and then there are office hours when they actually bring in the deals and they talk to us about specific deals and it turns out the classes and talks are largely worthless you can give all把我们知道的东西告诉他们;然后有答疑时段,他们真正带着交易来,跟我们讨论具体交易。结果发现,课程和讲座基本没什么用——你可以在大约一小时内
3:34:23the generic advice you need to give in about an hour and then after that all the additional advice is sore circumstantial that essentially cancels to zero if you try to give it in some top-down fashion but the office hours are把所有需要给的通用建议都给完,之后所有的额外建议都太依赖具体情境,如果你试图以某种自上而下的方式给出,基本上就抵消归零了。但答疑时段
3:34:35incredibly useful it just reinforces that this is one of those skills that can only be learned on the job and when you find a skill that can only be learned on the job by doing it that is a good indicator极其有用。它只是再次印证:这是那种只能在实战中学会的技能之一。当你发现一项技能只能通过实际去做、在职场上学会,那就是一个很好的指标,
3:34:45that you're dealing with specific knowledge another good indicator with you're doing specific knowledge is when you ask the person doing it what do you do every day and they can't give you a straight answer or get something on lines of说明你面对的是 specific knowledge。另一个判断你是否在做 specific knowledge 的好指标是:当你问正在做这件事的人“你每天做什么”,他们给不出一个直接的答案,或者只能说出类似
3:34:57what everyday is different based on what's going on that's a good indicator you're learning specific knowledge the thing is so complicated and it's so dependent upon circumstances that it can't be boiled down into a textbook form or communicated by a“每天都不一样,取决于当时的情况”这样的话——那就是个好指标,说明你在学 specific knowledge。这事太复杂,太依赖具体情境,没法浓缩成教科书形式,也没法由一
3:35:11makemoney consultant the Mafia figured out this apprenticeship model a long time ago the best way to end up running one of the families was to become the driver for the dawn of one of the families there's a complicated business Tony个赚钱顾问来传授。黑手党很久以前就搞明白了这种学徒模式:最终掌管其中一个家族的最好方式,就是先成为那个家族老大的司机。这可是门复杂的生意。
3:35:26Soprano said I'm a businessman who has to enforce my own contracts very complicated businessTony Soprano 说过:我是个必须自己执行合同的商人。非常复杂的生意。

00:00hey this is nivi you're listening to the navall podcast this is one giant mega sowed that collects every episode we've done on getting rich all of it based on his tweet storm of how to get rich without getting lucky I've collected them all here because we're going to switch topics to the new topic of happiness on the next episode we've published one of these giant mega subs before but this one's even bigger it's about three and a half hours long it covers all the tweets from the how to get rich tweet storm plus all the Q&A that we did after that plus ten minutes of bonus material at the very end that we've never released the overall sound quality of this

00:42mega sowed improves a lot after the first hour you can find a link to a clean transcript in the show notes or if you go to the website nav al there's no calm at the end I hope you enjoy you probably know Nepal from his Twitter account and we're gonna be talking about his epic tweet storm on how to get rich without getting lucky we're going to go through most of the tweets in detail giving the ball a chance to expand on them and just generally riff on the topic he'll probably throw in some ideas that he hasn't even published before he's also the co-founder of angel lists and opinions he's a prolific tech investor in companies like Twitter uber and

01:23many more and I'm the co-founder evangelist navall and I also co-authored the venture hacks blog with him back in the day yeah me how to get Mitch tweet storm definitely hit a nerve a lot of people say it was helpful reach across aisles and people outside of tech industry people in all walks of life people do want to know how to solve their money problems and everyone vaguely knows that they want to be wealthy but they don't have a good set of principles to do it by what's the difference between wealth money and status wealth is the thing that you really want wealth is assets that earn while you sleep wealth is the factory that with the robots as cranking out

02:03things wealth is the computer program that's running at night that's serving other customers wealth is even money in the bank that is being reinvested into other ass and into other businesses even a house can be a form of wealth because you can rent it out although it's probably a lower use of productivity but land and actually doing some commercial enterprise so my definition of wealth is much more businesses and assets that can earn while you sleep but really the reason you want wealth is because it buys you freedom so you don't have to wear a tire like a collar around your so you don't have to wake up at 7 a.m. and rush to work and sit and commute traffic so

02:39you don't have to waste away your entire life grinding all the productive hours into a way into a soulless job that doesn't fulfill you so the purpose of wealth is freedom it's nothing more than that it's like to buy fur coats or drive Ferraris or sail yachts or jet around the world in your Gulfstream that stuff gets really boring and really stupid really fast it's really just so that you are your own sovereign individual you're not gonna get that unless you really want it and the entire world wants it and the entire world is working hard at it and to some extent it is competitive it's a positive sum game but there are competitive elements to it because there's a finite

03:14amount of resources right now in society and to get the resources to do what you want you have to stand out money is how we transfer wealth money is social credits it is the ability to have credits and debits on other people's time if I do my job right if I create value for society Society says oh thank you we owe you something in the future for the work that you did in the past here's a little IOU let's call that money and that money gets the base because people steal the IOUs the government prints extra io u--'s people Rometsch under io u--'s but really what money is trying to be it is trying to be a reliable Iowa you from

03:53society that you are owed something for something you or someone who gave you that money did in the past and we can transfer these IOUs around so really money is how we transfer well there are fundamentally two huge games in life that people play one is the money game because money's not gonna solve all your problems but it's gonna solve all your money problems so I think that people know that they realize that so they want to make money but at the same time many of them deep down believe that they can't make it they don't want any wealth creation to happen so this virtue signal by attacking the whole enterprise by saying well making money is evil do it bottle

04:28blah but what they're trying to do is they're actually playing the other game to the status game they're trying to be high status in the eyes of other people watching by saying oh I don't need money we don't want money and then status is just your ranking in the social hierarchy so wealth is not a zero-sum game everybody in the world can have a house because you have a house doesn't take away from my ability to have a house if anything the more houses that are built the easier it becomes to build houses the more we know about building houses and just the more people that can have houses so wealth is a very positive sum game we create things together

05:00we're starting this endeavor to create this hopefully piece of art that explains what we're doing at the end of it something brand-new will be create it's a positive sub-game status on the other hand is a zero-sum game it's a very old game we've been playing it since monkey tribes and it's hierarchical who's number one who's number two who's number three and for a number three to move to number two has to move out of that slot so status is zero-sum game politics is an example of a status game even sports is an example of a status game to be the winner there must be a loser I don't fundamentally love status games they play an important role in our society so

05:36we figure out who's in charge but fundamentally you play them because they're necessary evil the problem is an evolutionary basis like if you go back thousands of years status is a much better predictor of survival than wealth as you couldn't have wealth before the farming age before farmers because you couldn't store things hunter-gatherers carried everything on their backs so hunter-gatherers lived entirely in status based societies farmers started going to wealth based societies and the modern industrial economies are much more heavily wealth based societies but there's always a subtle competition going on between status and wealth for example when journalists attack rich people or they attack the technology industry they're really bidding for status they're saying no the people are more important

06:18and I the journalist represents the people and therefore I am more important the problem is that by playing these status games to win at a status game you have to put somebody else down that's why you should avoid status games in your life because they make you into an angry combative person you're always fighting to put other people down to put yourself and the people that you like up and they're always going to exist no way around it but just realize that most of the times when you're trying to create wealth you're actually getting attacked by someone else and they're trying to look like a goody two-shoes but really what they're doing is they're trying to up their own status at

06:54your expense they're just playing a different game and it's a worse game it's a zero-sum game instead of a positive sum one thing you mentioned before the interview that stuck with me was the idea that you think everyone can become rich and that perhaps some of the ways of getting rich or the idea of wealth is vilified by some people in other countries say you want to expand on that a little bit yeah I think there's this notion that making money is evil right it's like rooted all the way back down to money's the root of all evil people think that bankers steal our money and you know it's somewhat true in that in a lot of the world there's a

07:33lot of theft going on all the time the history of the world in some sense is this predator-prey relationship between makers and takers there are people who go out and create things and build things and work hard on things and then they're people who come along and play with a sword or a gun or taxes or crony capitalism or communism or what-have-you there's all these different methods to steal even in nature there are more parasites than there are non parasitical organisms you have ton of parasites in you who are living off of you and the better ones are symbiotic they're giving something back but there are a lot that are just taking that's just the nature of how any complex system

08:07is built but what I am focused on is true wealth creation it's not about taking money it's not about taking something from somebody else but it's when creating abundance obviously there's not a finite number of jobs or a finite amount of wealth otherwise we will still be sitting around in caves figuring out how to divide a pieces of firewood and you know the occasional dead deer so most of the wealth and civilization in fact not most all of it has been created and it got created from somewhere it got created from people they got created from technology a critical productivity got created from hard work so this idea that if stolen is I think this horrible zero-sum game that people who

08:44are trying to gain status play but the reality is everyone can be rich and we can see that by seeing that in the first world everyone is richer than almost anyone who was alive too hundred years ago 200 years ago nobody had any biotics nobody had cars nobody had electricity nobody had the iPhone so all of these things are inventions that have made us wealthier as a species today I would rather be a poor person in the first world country than be a rich person in Louisa 14th France I'd rather be a poor person today than an aristocrat back then and that's just because of wealth creation the engine of technologies science that is applied for the purpose of creating abundance

09:23so I think fundamentally everybody can be wealthy and the thought experiment I want you to think through is imagine if everybody had the knowledge of a good software engineer and a good hardware engineer if you could go out there and you could build robots and computers and bridges and program them let's say every human knew how to do that what do you think society would look like in 20 years my guess is what would happen is we would build robots machines software and hardware to do everything and we would all be living in massive abundance we would essentially be retired in the sense that none of us would have to work for any of the basics we'd even have robotic nurses

10:02we have like machine driven hospitals we have self-driving cars we'd have farms that are a hundred percent automated we have clean energy so at that point we could use technology breakthroughs to get everything that we want it and if anyone is still working at that point they're working as a form of expressing their creativity they're working because it's in them to contribute and to build a design things but I don't think capitalism is evil capitalism is actually good it's just that it gets hijacked it gets hijacked by improper pricing of xq-- maladies it gets hijacked by improper deals where that you have corruption or you have monopolies over all capitalism is intrinsic to the human species capitalism is not something we

10:45invented capitalism is not even something we discovered it is innate to us in every exchange that we have when you and I exchange information I want some information back from you I give you information you give me information if we weren't having a good information exchange you go talk to somebody else so the notion of exchange and keeping track of credits and debits this is built into us as flexible social animals we are the only animal in the animal kingdom that cooperate across genetic boundaries most animals doesn't cooperate but when they do they cooperate only in packs where they Co evolved together and they share blood so they have some shared interests humans don't have that and what lets us cooperate

11:23it's because we can keep track of debits and credits who put in how much work who contributed how much that's all free market capitalism is so I strongly believe that it is innate to the human species and we are going to create more and more wealth and abundance for everybody everybody can be wealthy everybody can be retired everybody can be successful it is merely a question of Education and desire you have to want it if you don't want it that's fine then you opt out of the game but don't try and put down the people who are playing the game because that's the game that keeps you in a comfortable warm bed at night that's the game that keeps a roof

11:59over your head that's a game that keeps your supermarket's stock that's the game that keeps the iphone buzzing in your pocket so it is a beautiful game that is worth playing ethically rationally morally socially for the human race and it's gonna continue to make us all richer and richer until we have massive wealth creation for anybody who wants it and it's not just individual secretly despising wealth right there's countries groups political parties that overtly despise wealth or at least seem to that's right and so what those countries political parties and groups are reduced playing the zero-sum king of status and the process to destroy wealth creation they dragged everybody down to their which is why the u.s. is a very popular

12:41country for immigrants because it's the American dream anyone can come here pretty poor and then work really hard and make money and get wealthy but even just make some basic money for their obviously the definition of wealth is different for different people a first of all citizens definition of wealth might be oh I have to make millions of dollars and I'm completely done where's to a third-world poor immigrant just entering the country and we were poor immigrants who came here when I was fairly young to the United States wealth may just be a much lower number it may just be that I don't have to work a manual labor job for the rest of my life that I don't want work

13:11but groups that despise it will essentially bring the entire group down to that level if you get too many takers and not enough makers society falls apart you're in with a communist country look with Venezuela right they were so busy taking and dividing and reallocating that people are literally starving in the streets and losing kilograms of body weight every year just do sheer starvation another way think about it imagine an organism that has too many parasites you actually need some small number of parasites to stay healthy and you need a lot of symbols like all the mitochondria in all of our cells that help us respirate and burn oxygen these are symbols that help us survive we can survive without them

13:52but to me those are partners in the wealth creation that creates the human body but if you just were filled with parasites if you've got infected with worms or a virus or bacteria that were purely parasitical you would die so any organism can only withstand a small number of parasites and when the parasitic element gets too far out of control you die so you know that again I'm talking about ethical wealth patient and the time when monopolies and that I'm not promoting capitalism I'm gonna talk about miss price externalities like the environment I'm talking about free minds and free markets small steel exchange between humans that's voluntary and doesn't have an outsize impact on others but I think that kind of

14:30wealth creation if a society does not respect it the group does not respect it that society will plunge into ruin and darkness obviously we want to be wealthy and we want to get there in this lifetime without having to rely on luck a lot of people think making money is about luck it's not it's about becoming the kind of person that makes money you know I like to think that if I lost all my money and if you drop me on a random street in any english-speaking country within five ten years I'd be wealthy again right because it's just a skill set that I've developed and I think anyone can develop you know in a thousand parallel universes you want to

15:06be wealthy in 999 of them you don't want to be wealthy the 50 of them where you got lucky so we want to factor luck out of it there's really four kinds of luck that we were talking about this came from a book P marca Marc Andreessen wrote a blog post about it but there's different kinds of luck the first kind of luck he might just say is that blind luck where I just got lucky because something completely out of my control happened you know that's fortune that's fate etc then there's luck that comes through persistence hard work soeul motion which is when you're just running around creating lots of opportunities you're generating a lot of energy you're doing a lot

15:41of things lots of things will just get stirred up in the dust it's almost like mixing a petri dish and seeing what combines or mixing a bunch of reagents and seeing what combines you're just generally in a force and hustle and energy that luck will find you a third way is that you just become very good at spotting luck so if you are very skilled in a field you will notice when a lucky break happens in that field and other people who aren't attuned to it won't notice so you become sensitive to luck and that's the skill and knowledge and work and then the last kind of luck is the weirdest hardest kind but that's what we want to talk about

16:18which is where you build a unique character a unique brand a unique mindset where then luck finds you for example let's say that you're the best person in the world at deep-sea underwater diving and you're known to like take on Deep Sea underwater dives that nobody else will even attempt to dare and then by sheer luck somebody finds a sunken treasure ship off the coast they can't get at well their luck just became your luck because they're gonna come to you to get that treasure and you're gonna get paid for it now that's an extreme example but it's just showing how like the person who got lucky but find the treasure chest that was blind luck but then coming to you

16:59and asking you to extract it and having to give you half that's not luck you created your own luck you put yourself in a position to be able to capitalize on that luck or to attract that luck when nobody else has created that opportunity for themselves so when we talked about without getting lucky we want to be deterministic we don't want to leave it to chance do you want to elaborate a little bit more on the idea that in a thousand parallel universes you want to get rich in 999 of them I think some people are going to see that and say that sounds impossible sounds like it's too good to be true no I don't think it's impossible I think

17:33that you may have to work a little bit harder at it given your starting circumstances I mean remember I started as a poor kid in India right so if I can make it anybody can in that sense now obviously I had all my limbs and I had my mental faculties and I did have an education so there are some prerequisites you can't get past but if you're listening to this video or podcasts you probably have the requisite means at your disposal which is a functioning body and a functioning mind and I have encountered plenty of bad luck along the way first a little fortune that I made I instantly lost in the stock market the second little fortune that I made

18:06or I should have made I got cheated by my business partners it's only the third time around has been a charm and even then it has been a slow and steady struggle and I haven't made money in my life in one giant payout it's always been a whole bunch of small things piling up so it's more about consistently creating wealth by creating businesses and quitting opportunities and creating investments it hasn't been like a giant one-off thing my personal wealth has not been generated by one a big year it just stacks up little bit chips at a time more options more businesses more investments more things that can do same way someone like in a gala service he's building his brand online

18:46he's building videos it's not like any one video is going to suddenly shower him with riches overnight it's going to be a long lifetime of learning of reading of creating this is gonna compound so we're talking about getting wealthy so you can retire so you have your freedom I'm not retired a sense that you don't do anything but in the sense that you don't have to be any place you don't want to be you don't have to do anything you don't want to do and you can wake up when you want you can sleep and you want you don't have a boss that's freedom so we're talking about enough wealth to get to freedom and especially thanks to the Internet these

19:19days those opportunities are massively abundant I in fact have too many ways to make money I don't have enough time I literally have opportunities pouring out of my ears and the thing I keep running out of this time there's just so many ways to create wealth to create products to create businesses to create opportunities and to as a by-product get paid by society that I just can't even handle it all I think it's pretty interesting that the first three kinds of luck that you described there are very common cliches for them that everybody knows and then for that last kind of luck that comes to you out of the unique way that you act there's no real cliche for it so

19:59for the first three kinds there is dumb luck or fine luck that's the first kind of luck the second kind of luck does the cliche that fortune favors the bold that's a person who gets lucky just by stirring the pot and acting the third kind of luck people say that chance favors the prepared mind but for the fourth kind of luck there is not really a common cliche out there that matches the unique character of your action which i think is interesting and perhaps an opportunity and it also just shows that people aren't necessarily taking advantage of that kind of luck the way they should be I think also at that point it starts becoming so deterministic that it stops being

20:41luck so the definition starts fading from luck to more destiny so I would characterize that fourth one is you build your character in a certain way and then your character becomes your destiny one of the things I think that is important to making money when you want the kind of reputation that makes people do deals through you you know I use the example of like if you're a great diver then treasure hunters will come and give you a piece of the treasure for your diving skills if you're a trusted reliable high integrity long-term thinking deal maker then when other people want to do deals but they don't know how to do them in a trustworthy manner with strangers they will literally

21:21approach you and give you a cut of the deal or offer you a unique deal just because of the integrity and reputation that you've built up Warren Buffett he gets offered deals and he gets to buy companies and he gets to file warrants and bail out banks and do things that other people can't do because of his reputation but of course that's fragile it has accountability on the line it has a strong brand on the line and as we will talk about later that comes with accountability attached but I would say your character your reputation these are things that you can build that then will let you take out advantages of opportunities that other people may characterize as lucky but you

21:57know that it wasn't luck you said that this fourth kind of luck is more or less a destiny there's a quote from that original book that was in Mark's blog posts from Benjamin Disraeli who I think was the former prime minister of the UK the quote to describe the kind of luck was we make our fortunes and we call them fate there were a couple other interesting things about this kind of luck that were mentioned in the blog post I think it'll be good for the listeners to hear about is that this fourth kind of luck can almost come out of eccentric ways that you do your things and that eccentricity is not necessarily a bad thing in this case in

22:39fact it's a good thing yeah absolutely because the world is a very efficient place so everyone has dug through all the obvious places to dig and so to find something that's new and novel and uncovered it helps to be operating on a frontier where right there you have to be a little eccentric to be out on the frontier by yourself and then you just have to be willing to dig deeper than other people do deeper than seems irrational just because you're interested yeah the two quotes that I've seen that expressed this kind of luck in addition to that Benjamin Disraeli one are this one from Sam Altman where he said extreme people get extreme results I think that's pretty nice and

23:18then there's this other one from Jeffrey Pfeffer who is a professor at Stanford that you can't be normal and expect abnormal returns I've always enjoyed that one too yeah and one quote that I like which is the exact opposite of that is play stupid games win stupid prizes all right a lot of people spend a lot of their time playing social games like on Twitter where you're just trying to improve your social standing and you basically win stupid social prizes which are worthless I guess the last thing that I have from this blog post is just the idea that by pursuing these kinds of luck especially the last one basically everything but dumb luck by pursuing them you essentially run out

24:01of unlock so if you just keep stirring the pot and stirring the pot that alone you will run out of unlock yeah or it could just be reversion to the mean right so then you at least neutralize luck so that it's your own talents that come into play next you go into more specific details on how you can actually get rich and how you can't get rich the first point was about how you're not going to get rich renting of your time you must own equity up piece of the business to gain your financial freedom this is probably one of the absolute most important points people seem to think that you can create wealth and make money through work and it's

24:42probably not going to work there are many reasons for that but the most basic is just that your inputs are very closely tied to your outputs in almost any salary job even at one that's paying a lot per hour like a lawyer or a doctor you're still putting in the hours and every hour you get paid so what that means is when you're sleeping you're not earning when you're retired you're not earning when you're in vacation you're not earning and you can't earn nonlinearly if you look at even doctors who get rich like really rich it's because they open a business they open like a private practice and then private practice builds a brand and that brand attracts people or they

25:17build some kind of medical device or a procedure or a process where they've intellectual property so essentially you're working for somebody else and that person is taking on the risk and has the accountability and the intellectual property and the brand so they're just not gonna pay you enough they're gonna pay you the bare minimum that they have to to get you good a job and that can be a high bare minimum but it's still not gonna be true wealth where you're retired and then finally you're actually just not even creating that much original for society like I said this tweets term should have been called how to create wealth it's just how to get rich with a more catchy title but

25:50you're not creating new things for society you're just doing things over and over and you're essentially replaceable because you're now doing a set role most set roles can be taught if they can be taught like in a school then eventually you'll be competing with someone who's got more recent knowledge who's been taught and is coming in to replace you you're much more likely to be doing a job that can be eventually replaced by a robot or by an AI and it doesn't have to be a wholesale replaced overnight Akemi replace a little bit of a time and that eats into your wealth creation and therefore you're earning capability so fundamentally your inputs are matched to your outputs you are replaceable and

26:29you're not being creative I just don't think that that is the way that you can truly make money so everybody who really makes money at some point owns a piece of a product or a business or some kind of IP that can be through stock options so if you be working a tech company that's a fine way to start but usually the real wealth is created by starting your own companies or by you know even investors there in an investment for them and they're buying equity so these are much more the routes to wealth it doesn't come to the hours you really just want a job or a career or profession where your inputs don't matter your outputs so if you

27:05look at modern society I get into later in the tweet storm businesses that have high creativity and high leverage tends to be ones where you could do an hour of work and it can have a huge effect or you can do a thousand hours of working can have no effect for example look at software engineering one great engineer can for example create Bitcoin and create billions of dollars with the value an engineer who's working on the wrong thing or not quite as good or just not a creative or thoughtful or whatever can work for an entire year and every piece of code they ship and whatnot getting used customers don't want it that is an example of a profession where the

27:41input and the outputs are highly disconnected it's not based on the number of hours that you put in whereas on the extreme other end if you're a lumberjack even the best lumberjack in the world assuming they're not working with tools so the inputs and outputs really connected they're just using an axe or a saw the best lumberjack in the world maybe like 3x better than one of the worst Lumberjacks right it's not going to be a gigantic difference so you want to look for professions and careers where the inputs and the outputs are highly disconnected this is another way of saying that you want to look for things that are leveraged and by leverage I don't mean financial leverage alone like

28:14Wall Street uses and that has a bad name I'm just talking about tools we're using tools computer is a tool that software engineers use if I'm a lumberjack with bulldozers and automatic robot axes and saws I'm gonna be using tools and have more leverage than someone who's just using his bare hand and try to rip the trees out by their roots tools and leverage are what create this disconnection between inputs and outputs creativity so the higher the creativity component of a profession the more likely it is to have disconnected inputs and outputs so I think that if you're looking at professions where you're inputting your outputs are highly connected it's gonna be very very very hard to create wealth and make

28:53wealth for yourself in that process any other big thing you should avoid other than renting out your time yeah there are two tweets that I put out that are related so the first one is talking about beer or something like how it your lifestyle you know has to upgrade shouldn't get upgraded too fast and that one said people who are living far below their means enjoy your freedom that people busy upgrading their lifestyles just can't fathom and I think that's very important like just to not upgrade your lifestyle all the time to maintain your freedom and it just gives your freedom of operation once you make a little bit of money you still want to be living like your old self

29:28so that's just the worry goes away so don't want to upgrade that house lifestyle and all that stuff let's say you're gonna get a thousand dollars an hour the problem is that when you go into a work lifestyle like that you don't just suddenly go from making twenty dollars an hour to making a thousand dollars an hour that's a progression over a long career and as that happens one subtle problem is that you upgrade your lifestyle as you make more and more money and that upgrading of the lifestyle ups what you consider to be wealth and you stay in this wage slave trap so I forget who said it maybe it was nothing too late but he said you know the

30:02most dangerous things are heroin and a monthly salary right because they're highly addictive the way you want to get wealthy is you want to be poor and working and working and this is for example how the tech industry works well you don't make any money for ten years and then suddenly in year 11 you might have a giant payday which is what by the way one reason why these very high marginal tax rates for the so-called wealthy or flawed because the highest risk taking most creative professions literally lose money for a decade over your life while you take massive risk and you bleed and bleed and then suddenly in year 11 or year 15 you might have one single big payday

30:37but then of course Uncle Sam show up and say hey you know what you just made a lot of money this year therefore you're rich therefore you're evil and you got to hand it all over to us so it just destroys those kinds of creative risk-taking professions but ideally you want to make your money in discrete lumps separated over long periods of time so that your own lifestyle does not have a chance to adapt quickly and then you can say okay now I'm done now I'm retired now I'm free I'm still gonna work because you got to do something with your life but I'm gonna work on only the things that I want when I want and to be much more

31:12creative expression and much less about money you're not going to get rich renting out your time but you say that you will get rich by giving society what it wants but does not yet know how to get at scale that's right so essentially I could we talked about before money is IO used from society saying you did something good in the past now here's something that we owe you for the future and so society will pay you for creating things that it wants but society doesn't yet know how to create those things because if it did it would need you they would already be stamped out big time almost everything is in your house and your workplace and on the street

31:53used to be technology at one point in time at the time when oil was technology that made JD rockefeller rich there's a time when cars were technology that made Henry Ford rich so technology is just a set of things as Alan Kay said that don't quite work yet once something works is no longer technology so society always wants new things and if you want to be wealthy you want to figure out which one of those things you can provide for society that it does not yet know how to get but it will want that's natural to you and within your skill set within your capabilities and then you have to figure out to scale it because if you just build one

32:29of it that's not enough you gotta build thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions or billions of them so everybody can have one Steve Jobs and his team of course figured out that society would want smart phones computer in their pocket that had all the phone capability times a hundred and be easy to use so they figured out how to build that and then they figured out how to scale it and they figured out how to get one into every first world citizens pocket and eventually every third world citizen to and so because of that they're heavily rewarded an Apple is the most valuable company in the world the way I tried to put it was that the entrepreneurs job is

33:03to try to bring the high-end to the mass market it starts as high-end first it starts as an act of creativity first you create just because you want it you want it and you know how to build it and you need it and so you build it for yourself then you figure out how to get it to other people and then for a little while rich people have it like for example rich people had then they had black town cars and then uber came along and everyone's private driver it was available to everybody and now you can even see Ober pools that are replacing shuttle buses because it's more convenient and then you get scooters which are even further down market

33:37of that so you're right it's about distributing what rich people used to have to everybody but the entrepreneurs job starts even before that which is creation entrepreneurship is essentially an act of creating something new from scratch predicting the society will want it and then figuring out how to scale it and get it to everybody in a profitable way in a self-sustaining way let's look at this next tweet which I thought was cryptic and also super interesting about the kind of job or career that you might have you said the Internet has massively broaden the possible space of careers most people haven't figured this out yet the fundamental property of the internet more than any other single thing is it connects every

34:20human to each other human on the planet you can now reach everyone whether it's by emailing them personally lettuce by broadcast into them on Twitter whether it's by posting something on Facebook that they find whether it's by putting up a website they come in access it connects everyone to everyone so the Internet is an inter networking tool it connects everybody that is its superpower so you want to use that what that helps you figure out is that the internet means that you can find your audience for your product or your talent and skill no matter how far away they are for example may not who's illustrators if he was in these videos pre-internet how would he get the message out there

34:59it would just be what would he do he would run around where he lives in his neighborhood showing it to people a computer or a screen or he would try to get it played in his local movie theater it was impossible it only works because he can put it on the Internet and then how many people in the world are really interested in it or even interested in what we're talking about really gonna absorb it right it's gonna be a very small subset of humanity the key is being able to reach them so what the internet does is allows any niche obsession which could be just the weirdest thing it could be like people who collect snakes they're like people who

35:29like to ride hot-air balloons the people who like to sail around the world by themselves just one person on a craft or someone who's obsessed with miniature cooking like there's this whole Japanese nature cooking phenomenon or there's a show about a woman goes in people's houses and tidies it up right so whatever niche obsession you have the Internet allows of the scale now that's not to say that what you build will be the next Facebook reach billions of users but if you just want to reach 50,000 passionate people like you there's an audience out there for you so the beauty of this is that we have 7 billion beings on this planet the combinatorial of human DNA are incredible everyone is

36:04completely different you'll never meet any two people who are even vaguely similar to each other that can substitute for each other it's not you can say well maybe just left my life so I can have this other person come in and he's just like maybe and I get the same feelings let's say in responses and the same ideas no there are no substitutes for people are completely unique so given that each person has different skill sets different interests different obsessions and it's that diversity that becomes a creative superpower so each person can be creatively superb at their own unique thing but before that didn't matter because if you were living a little fishing village in Italy like your fishing village didn't

36:40literally need your completely unique skill and you had to conform to just a few jobs that were available but now today you can be completely unique you can go out on the internet and you can find your audience and you can build a business and create a product and build wealth and make people happy just uniquely expressing yourself through the internet space of careers has been so broaden eSports players people making millions of dollars x fortnight people creating videos and uploading them youtube broadcasters bloggers you know a podcasters Joe Rogan I read true or false I don't know but I read that he's going to make about a hundred million dollars a year on his podcast and he's had two billion

37:17downloads even PewDiePie is a hilarious tweet that every tweeted the other day PewDiePie is the number one trusted name in news this is a kid I think in Sweden and he's got three times the distribution of the top cable news networks just on his news channel it's not even on his entertainment channel the internet enables any niche interest as long as you're the best at it to scale out and the great news is because every human is different everyone is the best at something you being themselves another tweet I had that is worth weaving in but didn't go into this tweet storm was a very simple one I liked things from making them down because they're easy to remember it easy

37:54to hug on to but that one was escape competition through authenticity so when you're competing with people it's because you're copying them it's because you're trying to do the same thing but every human is different don't copy I know where magnetic creatures and rené girard has a whole new message theory but it's much easier than that don't imitate don't copy just do your own thing no one can compete with you on being you it's that simple and so the more authentic you are to who you are and what you love to do the less competition you're gonna have so you can escape competition through authenticity when you realize that no one can compete with you on being you and normally that

38:31would have been useless advice pre internet post Internet you can turn that into a career talk a little bit about what industries you should think about working in what kind of job you should have and who you might want to work with so you said one should pick an industry where you can play long-term games with long-term people why yeah this is an insight into what makes Silicon Valley work and what makes high trust societies work essentially all the benefits in life come from compound interests whether it's in relationships or making money or in learning so compound interest is a marvelous force where it's like you know you start out with one X what you have and then if you increased

39:1220 percent a year for 30 years it's not that you got 30 years x 20 percent added on it was compounding so it just grew grew and grew until you suddenly got a massive amount of whatever it is whether it's goodwill or love or relationships or money so I think compound interest is a very important force you have to go to play a long-term game and long-term games are good matches for compound interest they're also good for trust if you look at prisoner's dilemma type games the solution to prisoner's dilemma is tit for tat which is I'm just gonna do to you what you did last time to me with some forgiveness in case there was a mistake made but that

39:45only works in an iterated prisoner's dilemma in other words if we play the game multiple times so if you're in a situation like for example you're in Silicon Valley where people are doing business with each other and they know each other they trust each other then they do right by each other because they know this person will be around for the next game now of course that doesn't always work because you can make so much money in one move in Silicon Valley sometimes you betray each other because they're just like I'm gonna get rich enough of office that I don't care so there can be exceptions to all these circumstances but essentially if you want to be successful you have to

40:15work with other people and you have to figure out who can you trust and who can you trust over a long long period of time that you can just keep playing the game with them so that compound interest in high trust will make it easy to play the game and will let you collect the major rewards which are usually at the end of the cycle so for example Warren Buffett has done really well as an investor in the US stock market but the biggest reason he could do that was because the US stock market has been stable and around and didn't get for example seized by the government during a bad administration or the u.s. didn't plunge in some war the

40:49underlying platform didn't get destroyed so in his case he was playing a long-term game and the trust came from the US stock market stability in Silicon Valley the trust comes from the network of people in the small geographic area that you figure out over time who you can work with who you can't if you keep switching locations you keep switching groups let's say you started out in the woodworking industry and you build up a network there and you're working hard you're trying to build a product in woodworking industry and then suddenly another industry comes along that's adjacent but different but you don't really know anybody in it and you want to dive in and make money there if you keep hopping

41:22from industry you know actually I need to open a line of electric car stations for electric car refueling that might make sense it might be the best opportunity but every time you reset every time you wander out of where you built your network you're gonna be starting from scratch you're not gonna know who to trust they're not gonna trust you they're also industries in which people are transient by definition they're always coming in and going out politics is an example of that right in politics new people are being elected you see in politics that when you have a lot of old-timers like the Senate people have been around for a long time and they've been career politicians yeah they love them

41:57downside the career politicians that corruption but an upside is they actually get deals done with each other because they know the other person is gonna be in the same position ten years from now and they have to keep dealing with them so they might as well learn how to cooperate where every time you get like a new incoming freshman class in the House of Representatives which turns over every two years the big wave election nothing gets done because a lot of fighting because I just got here I don't know you I don't know if you're gonna be around why should I work with you rather than just try and do whatever I think is right so it's important to pick an

42:26industry where you can play long-term games and with long-term people so those people have to signal that they're going to be around for a long time that they're ethical and their ethics are visible to their action in a long-term game it seems that everybody is making each other rich and in a short-term game it seems like everybody is making themselves rich I think that is a brilliant formulation yeah in a long-term game it's positive some we're all baking acquired together we're trying to make it as big as possible in a short-term game we're cutting up the pie now this is not to excuse the Socialists right the Socialists those people who are not involved in baking the pie who show up

43:06at the end and say I want a slice or I want the whole pie they show up with the guns but I think a good leader doesn't take credit a good leader tries to inspire people's that the team get the job done and then things get divided up according to fairness and who contributed how much or as close to it as possible and took a risk as opposed to just whoever has the longest night the sharpest knives at the end so these next two tweets are play iterated games all returns in life whether in wealth relationships or knowledge come from compound interest yeah when you have been doing business with somebody you've been friends with somebody for 10 years 20 years

43:4130 years it just gets better and better because you trust them so easy if the friction goes down you can do bigger and bigger things together for example you know the simplest one is getting married to someone having kids and raising children like that's compound interest right investing in those relationships those relations and would be invaluable compared to more casual relationships it's true in health and fitness you know the fitter you are the easier it is to stay fit where's the more you'd deteriorate your body the harder it is to come back and claw your way back to a baseline and requires heroic acts regarding compound interest I think I saw you retweet something awhile back maybe it was from Edie

44:16Lattimore it went something along the lines of get some traction get purchase and don't lose it so the idea was to gain some initial traction and never fall back just keep ratcheting up and up I don't remember exactly but I think that was right yeah I was a kid traction don't let go it was a good one yeah in terms of pick people to work with that I have high intelligence high energy and high integrity I find that's the three part checklist that you cannot compromise on you need someone who's smart or they're heading in the wrong direction and you're not gonna end up in the right place you need someone high energy because the world is full of smart lazy

44:53people we all know people in our lives are really smart but you know can't get out of bed or lift a finger and we also know people have a very high energy but not that smart so they work hard but then running in the wrong direction and smart it's not a pejorative it's not meant to be like someone smart someone else is stupid but it's more than everyone's smart at different things so depending on what you want to do well you have to find someone who's smart at that thing and then energy a lot of times people are unmotivated for a specific thing but they're not motivated for other things for example someone might be really unmotivated to go to a

45:23job and sit in an office but they might be really motivated to go paint right well in that case they should be a painter they should be putting art up on the internet trying to figure out how to build a career out of that rather than wearing a collar around their neck and going to a dreary job and then high integrity is the most important because otherwise it got the other two what you have is you have a smart and hardworking crook who's eventually gonna cheat you so you have to figure out if the person is high integrity and as we talked about the way you do that is through signals and signals is what they do not what they say

45:51it's all the nonverbal stuff that people do when they think nobody's looking with respect to the energy there was this interesting thing from Sam Altman a while back where he was talking about delegation and even saying one of the important things for delegation is delegate to people who are actually good at the thing that you want to do it's the most obvious thing but it seems like you want to partner with people who are naturally going to do the things that you want them to do yeah I almost won't start a company or hire a person or work with somebody if I just don't think they're into what I wanted to do when I was younger I used to try and

46:29talk people into things I was in this idea you can sell someone into doing something but you can't you can't keep them motivated you can get them inspired initially it might work if you're a king like Henry the fifth you're trying to get them to just charge in the battle and then they'll figure it out but if you're trying to keep someone motivated for the long term but motivation has to come intrinsically you can't just create it nor can you be the crutch for them if they don't have that intrinsic motivation so you have to make sure people actually are high-energy and want to do what you want them to do what you want to work with them reading signals is

46:57very very important signals are what people do despite what they say so it's important to pay attention to subtle signals we all know that socially if someone treats a waiter or waitress in a restaurant and we badly then it's only a matter of time until they treat you badly if somebody screws over an enemy and is vindictive towards them well it's only a matter of time before they redefine you from friend to enemy and you feel their wrath so angry outraged vindictive short-term thinking people are essentially that way in many interactions in their life people are oddly consistent it's one of things you learn about them so you want to find long-term people you want to find people who seem irrationally

47:36ethical for example I had one friend of mine it was company I invested in and the company failed and he could have wiped out all the investors but he kept putting more and more personal money in through three different pivots he put personal money in until the company finally succeeded and in the process he never what got the investors and I was always grateful to him for that I said like wow that's amazing that you know you were so good to your investors you didn't wipe them out and he got offended by that he said I didn't do it for you I didn't do it for my investors I did it for me it's my own self-esteem it's what I care

48:08about that's how I live my life that's the kind of person you want to work with another quote that I like I would tweet on this I think I read this somewhere else which me said I'm not taking credit for this but I modified a little bit which is that self-esteem is a reputation that you have with yourself you'll always know so good people moral people ethical people easy to work with people reliable people tend to have very high self-esteem because they have very good reputation with themselves and they understand that it's not ego self esteem and ego are different things because ego can be undeserving but self esteem at least you feel like you lived up to your own internal

48:43moral code of ethics and so it's very hard to work with people who end up being low integrity that it's hard to figure out who's high integrity and low integrity generally the more someone is saying that their moral and ethical and high integrity the less likely they're to be that way it's very much like status signaling if you overtly bid for star if you already talked about being high status that is a low status move if you openly talk about how honest and reliable and trustworthy you are you're probably not that honest and trustworthy that is a characteristic of conman so yeah picking an industry in which you can play long-term games with long-term people let's look at this last tweet

49:22you said don't partner with cynics and pessimists their beliefs are self-fulfilling yeah essentially to create things you have to be a rational optimist rational in the sense that you have to go see the world for what it really is and yet you have to be optimistic about your own capabilities and your tymberlee to get things done we all know people who are consistently pessimistic who will shoot down everything everyone in their life has like the helpful critical guy right he thinks he's being helpful but he's actually being critical and he's a downer on everything that person will not only never do anything great in their lives they'll prevent other people around them for doing something great they think their job is

50:01to shoot holes in things and it's okay to shoot holes in things as long as you come up with a solution there's also the classic like military line I will lead follow or get out of the way and these people want a fourth option well they don't want to lead they don't want to follow but they don't want to get out of the way they want to tell you why the things not going to work and all the really successful people I know have a very strong action bias they just do things the easiest way to figure out if something is viable or not is by doing it at least do the first step in the second step in the third and then decide so if you want to be successful in life creating wealth or having good relationships or being fit or even being happy you need to have an action bias towards getting what you want and you have to be

50:42optimistic about it not irrationally there's nothing worse than someone who's is the foolhardy and chasing that's not work that's that's a rational optimist but you have to be rational know all the pitfalls know the downsides but still keep your chin up I mean you've got one life on this planet why not try to build something big this is the beauty of Elon Musk and why I think he inspires so many people is just when he takes on really really big audacious tasks and he provides an example for people to think big and it takes a lot of work to build even small things I don't think the corner grocery store owner is working any less hard than Elon Musk pouring any

51:16less sweat and toil into it maybe even more but for whatever reason you know education circumstance they didn't get the chance to think as big so the outcomes not as big so it's just better to think big obviously rationally within your means stay optimistic the cynics and the pessimists what they're really saying and fortunate but they're saying I've given up I don't think I can do anything and so the world to me just looks like a world where nobody can do anything and so why should you go do something because if you fail then I'm right which is great but if you succeed and you just make me look bad yeah it's probably better to be an irrational optimist than it

51:53is to be a rational cynic yeah there's a completely rational frame on why you should be an optimist historically if you go back 2,000 years 5,000 there's 10,000 years to people are wandering through a jungle they hear a tiger one's an optimist and says oh it's not headed our way the other one says I'm a pessimist I'm out of here and the pessimist runs and survives and the optimist gets eaten so we descended from pessimists we're genetically hardwired to be pessimists but modern society is far far safer there are no Tigers wandering down the street it's very unlikely that you will end up in total ruin although you should avoid total ruin much more likely if the upside is unlimited and

52:31the downside is limited so adapting for modern society means overriding your pessimism and taking slightly irrationally optimistic bets because the upside is unlimited if you start the next SpaceX or Tesla or uber you can make billions of dollars of value for society and for yourself and change the world and if you fail that's the big deal you lost a few million dollars and invest your money and they've got plenty more and that's the bet they take the chances that you will succeed it made sense to be pessimistic in the past it makes sense to be optimistic today especially if you're educated and living in a first world country even a third world country actually think the economic opportunity in third world

53:08countries are much larger the one thing you have to avoid is the risk of ruin ruin means to stay out of so don't do anything that's illegal it's never worth it to wear an orange jumpsuit and stay out of total catastrophic loss that could mean that you stay out of things that could be physically dangerous hurt your body you have to watch your health and stay out of things that can cause you to lose all Capital all of your savings it'll gamble everything at one go but you take rationally optimistic bets with big upside I think there's people that will try and build up your ideas and build on your ideas no matter how far-fetched they might seem and then there

53:43are people who will list out all the obvious exceptions no matter how obvious they are and fortunately in the startup world I don't even really get exposed to the people that are giving you the obvious exceptions and all the reasons it's not going to work I'd barely get exposed to that anymore absolute way today's forum Scott Adams got so annoyed by this dude he came up with the phrase an acronym which is but of course there are obvious exceptions BOC ta OE and he used to like pin that acronym at the end of his articles for a while but twitterings just like overrun with nit pickers and which exactly as you're pointing out Silicon Valley has learned that the upside is

54:21so great that you never look down on the slavi kid who's wearing a hoodie and has like coffee on his shoes and just look like a slob because you don't know if he's gonna be the next Mark Zuckerberg or the next Reid Hoffman so you gotta treat everybody with respect you gotta look up to every possibility and opportunity because the upside is so unlimited the downside is so limited in the modern world especially with financial assets and instruments you want to talk a little bit about the skills that you need in particular specific knowledge accountability leverage and judgment so the first tweet in this area is arm yourself with specific knowledge accountability and leverage and I'll throw in judgment as well

55:05I don't think you covered that in that particular tweet if you want to make money you have to get paid at scale and why you that's accountability at scale that's leverage and just you getting paid as opposed to somebody else getting paid that's specific knowledge so specific knowledge is probably the hardest thing to get across in this whole tweet storm and it's probably the thing that people get the most confused about the thing is that we have this idea that everything can be taught everything can be taught in school and it's not true that everything can be taught in fact the most interesting things cannot be taught thing can be learned and very often that learning either comes from some innate

55:47characteristics in your DNA or it could be through your childhood where you learn soft skills which are very very hard to teach later on in life or it's something that is brand-new so nobody else knows how to do it either or it's true on-the-job training because your pattern matching into highly complex environments building judgment in a specific domain classically example is investing but it could be in anything it could be in judgment in running a fleet of trucks it could be a judgement in weather forecasting so specific knowledge is the knowledge that you care about especially if you're later in life let's say your post 20 21 22 you almost don't get to choose which specific knowledge you have rather you

56:28get to look at what you have already built by that point in time and then you can build on top of it the first thing to notice about specific knowledge is that you can't be trained for it if you can be trained for it if you can go to a class and learn specific knowledge then somebody else can be trained for it - and then we can mass produce and mass train people heck we even program computers to do it and eventually we can program robots to walk around doing it so if that's the case then you're extremely replaceable and all we have to pay you is the minimum wage that we have to pay you to get you to do it when there are lots of other takers who can be trained to do it so really your returns just devolve into your cost of training plus the return on investment on that training so you really want to pick up specific

57:10knowledge you need your schooling you need your training to be able to capitalize on the best specific knowledge but the part of it that Juliet paid for is the specific knowledge for example someone who goes and gets a degree in psychology and then becomes a salesperson well if they were already a formidable salesperson I had great salesmanship to begin with then the psychology degree is leverage it arms them and they do much better at sales but if they were always an introvert never very good at sales and they're trying to use psychology to learn sales they're just not gonna get that great at so civic knowledge is found much more by pursuing your innate talents your genuine curiosity and your passion

57:48it's not by going to school for whatever is the hottest job it's not for going into whatever field investors the hottest very often specific knowledge is at the edge of knowledge it's also stuff that's just being figured out or is really hard to figure out so if you're not 100% into it somebody else who is 100% into it will outperform you and they won't just outperform you by a little bit they'll outperform you by a lot because now we're operating the domain of ideas compound interest really applies and leverage really applies so if you're operating with a thousand times leverage and somebody is right 80 percent of the time and somebody is else right 90 percent of time the person who's

58:27right 90 percent of time will literally get paid hundreds of times more by the market because of the leverage and because of the compounding factors in being correct so you really want to make sure you're good at it so they're genuine curiosity is very important so very often it's not something you sit down and you reason about it's more found by observation you almost have to look back on your own life and see what you're actually good at for example I wanted to be a scientist and that is where a lot of my moral hierarchy comes from I view scientists at the top of the production chain for Humanity and the group of scientists who have made real breakthroughs and contributions

59:03have probably added more to human society and I think than any single other class of human beings not to take away anything from art or politics or engineering or business but without the science you know we'd still be scrabbling the dirt fighting with sticks and trying to start fires my whole value system was built around scientists and I wanted to be a great scientist but when I actually look back at what I was uniquely good at and what I ended up spending my time doing it was more around making money tinkering with technology and selling people on things explaining things talking to people so I have some sales skills which is a form of specific knowledge that I have I have

59:41some analytical skills around how to make money and I having this ability to absorb data obsess about it and break it down and that is a specific skill that I have I also just love tinkering with technology and all of this stuff feels like play to me but it looks like work to others so there are other people to whom these things would be hard they say like well how do I get good at being pithy and selling ideas well if you're not already good at it or they're not really into it maybe it's not your thing focus on the thing that you are really into this is ironic but the first person that actually point out my real specific knowledge

1:00:15was my mother and she did it as an aside talking from the kitchen and she said it when I was like 15 or 16 years old I was telling a friend of mine that I wanted to be an astrophysicist and she said no you're gonna go into business and I was like what my mom's telling me I'm gonna be in business I'm gonna be an astrophysicist mom doesn't know what she's talking about but mom knew exactly what she was talking about she had already observed that every time we walked down the street I would critique the local pizza parlor on why they were selling their slices a certain way with certain toppings and why the process of ordering was this way

1:00:44when it should have been that way so she knew that I was just had more of a business curious mind but then my obsession with science combined to create technology and technology businesses where I found myself so very often your specific knowledge is observed and often observed by other people who know you well and reveal in situations rather than something that you come up with to the extent that specific knowledge is taught it's on the job it's through apprenticeships and that's why the best businesses the best careers are the apprenticeship careers because those are things that society still has not figured out how to train and automate yet the classic line here is that Warren Buffett went to Benjamin Graham when

1:01:20he got out of school and Benjamin Graham was the author the intelligent investor is sort of modernized or created value investing as a discipline and Warren Buffett went to Benjamin Graham and offered to work for him for free and Graham said actually you're overpriced free is overpriced and Graham was absolutely right that when it comes to a very valuable apprenticeship like the type that Graham was going to give Buffett Buffett should have been paying him a lot of money and that right there tells you that those are skills worth knowing specific knowledge also tends to be technical and creative so on the bleeding edge of technology on the bleeding edge of art on the bleeding edge of communication even today for

1:01:58example there are probably meme lords out there on the internet who can create incredible memes that will spread the idea to millions of people or are very persuasive like for example Scott Adams is a good example this he's essentially becoming one of the most credible people in the world by making accurate predictions through persuasive arguments and videos and that is specific knowledge that he has built up over the because he got obsessed with hypnosis when he was young he learned how to communicate through cartooning he embraced periscope early so he's been practicing lots of conversation he's read all the books on the topic he's employed it in his everyday life if you look at his girlfriend she's like this beautiful young

1:02:36Instagram model that is an example of someone who has built up a specific knowledge over the course of his career it's highly creative it has elements of being technical in it and it's something that is never gonna be automated no one's gonna take that away from him because he's also accountable under one brand as Scott Adams and he's operating with a leverage of media with periscope and drawing Dilbert cartoons and writing books he has massive leverage on top of that brand and he can build wealth out of it if he wanted to build additional wealth beyond what he already has should we be calling it unique knowledge or the specific knowledge somehow make more sense for it you know I came

1:03:13up with his framework when I was really young and we're talking decades and decades it's not probably over 30 years old and so at the time too specific knowledge stuck with me so that is how I think about it the reason I didn't try and change it is because every other term that I found for it was overloaded in a different way at least specific knowledge isn't that used I can rebrand it the probably unique knowledge is yeah maybe it's unique but if I learn it from somebody else is no longer unique then we both know it so it's not so much that it is unique it's that it is highly specific the situation it's specific to the individual it's specific

1:03:48to the problem and it can only be built as part of a larger obsession interest and time spent in that domain they can't just be read straight out of a single book nor can be taught in a single course nor can it be programmed into a single algorithm speaking of Scott Adams he's got a blog post on how to build your career by getting in say the top 25 percentile at three or more things and by doing that you become the only person in the world who can do those three things in the 25th percentile so instead of trying to be the best at one thing you just try to be very very good at three or more things is that a way of building specific knowledge you think the best way is just to follow your own obsession and somewhere in the back of your mind you can realize that hey actually this obsession like I'll keep an eye out for the

1:04:44commercial aspects of it but I think if you go around trying to build it a little too deliberately if you become too goal-oriented on the money then you won't pick the right thing you won't actually pick the thing that you love to do so you won't go deep enough into it scott adams is observation is a good one it's predicated on statistics let's say there's 10,000 areas that are valuable to the human race today in terms of knowledge to have and the number one in those 10,000 slots is taken right someone else is likely to be the number one each of those 10,000 unless you happen to be one of the 10,000 most obsessed people in the world at a given

1:05:18thing but when you start going the of combining well number three thousand seven or twenty eight with top-notch sales skills and really good writing skills and so on with whom understands accounting and finance really well when the need for that intersection arrives you've expanded now from ten thousand through comminute oryx to millions or tens of millions so it just becomes much less competitive also there's diminishing returns so it's much easier to be top 75 percentile at three or four things that is to be literally the number one at something I think it's a very pragmatic approach but I think it's important that one not start assembling things to deliberately because you do want to pick things where you are a everyone

1:06:00is a natural at something we're all familiar with that phrase unnatural or this person is that a natural at meeting men or where this person is a natural socialite this person is a natural programmer this person is a natural reader so whatever you are a natural at you want to double down on that and then there are probably multiple things you are natural that because personalities and humans are very complex so we want to be able to take the things that you are a natural at and combine them so that you automatically just through sheer interest and enjoyment end up top 25 or top 10 or top 5% at a number of things talking about combining skills you said that you

1:06:39should learn to sell learn to build if you can do both you will be unstoppable you know this is a very broad category now but it's too broad categories one is building the product which is hard and it's a multivariate that can include design that can include development that can include manufacturing logistics procurement they could even be designing and operating a service it has many many definitions but in every industry there is a definition of the Builder in our tech industry that's the CTO as the programmer is the software engineer a hardware engineer but you know even in like a laundry business it could be the person who's building the laundry service who is making the trains run on time who's

1:07:20making sure all the clothes end up in the right place the right time and so on then the other side of it is the sales side again selling has a very broad definition selling doesn't actually just mean selling individual customers but it could mean marketing it could mean communicating it could mean recruiting it could mean raising money it could mean inspiring people it could be doing PR so it's a broad umbrella category so generally the Silicon Valley startup model tends to work fast it's not the only way but it is probably the most common way when you have two founders one of whom is a world-class at sales and one of whom is world-class at building an example this course Steve

1:07:59Jobs and Steve Wozniak with Apple gates and Allen probably had similar responsibilities early on with Microsoft Larry and Sergey you know probably broke down along those lines although it's a little different there because that was a very technical product delivered to end-users through a simple interface but generally you will see this pattern repeated over and over there's a builder and there's a seller there's a CEO and CTO combo and the venture and Technology investors are almost trained to look for this combo whenever possible it's the magic combination the ultimate is when one individual can do both that's when you get true superpowers that's when you get people who can create entire industries the living example is Elon Musk he may not

1:08:39necessarily building the Rockets himself but he understands enough that he actually makes technical contributions he understands the technology well enough that no one's gonna snow him on it and he's not running around making claims that he doesn't think he can eventually deliver he may be optimistic in the timelines but he thinks it's within reasonableness of delivery even Steve Jobs develop enough product skills and was involved enough in the Prada that he also operated both of these domains Larry Ellison starred as a programmer and I think wrote the first version of Oracle Rosa actually have really involved in it Marc Andreessen was also in this domain he may not have had enough confidence in the sales skills but he was the programmer

1:09:16who wrote Netscape Navigator a big chunk of it so I think the real Giants in any field are the people who can both build and sell and usually the building is the thing that like a salesperson can't pick up building later in life it requires too much focused time but a builder can pick up selling a little bit later especially if they were already in Italy wired to be a good communicator Bill Gates famously paraphrase this as I would rather teach an engineer marketing than a marketer engineering I think if you start out with a building mentality and you have building skills and still early enough in your life or you have enough focused time that you think you can learn

1:09:57selling and you have some natural characteristics for your good sales person then you can double down on those now your sales skills could be in a different than traditional domain so for example let's say you're a really good engineer and then people are saying well now you need to be good at sales well you may not be good at hand-to-hand sales but you may be a really good writer and writing is a skill that can be learned much more easily than say in-person selling and so you may just cultivate writing skills until you become a good online communicator and then use that for your sales on the other hand it could just be that you're a good builder and you're bad

1:10:31at writing and you don't like communicate to mass audiences which are good one-on-one so then you might use your sales skills for recruiting or for fundraising which are more one-on-one kinds of endeavors this is pointing out that if you're at the intersection of these two don't despair because you're not going to be the best technologist and you're not going to be the best salesperson but in a weird way that combination back to the scott adams skill stack that combination of two is unstoppable long term people who understand the underlying product and how to build it and can sell it these are catnip to investors these people can break down walls if they have enough energy and they can get almost anything

1:11:08done if you could only pick one to be good at which one would you pick when you're trying to stand out from the noise bill is actually better because there's so many hustlers and salespeople who have nothing to back them up when you're starting out when you're trying to be recognized building is better but much later down the line building gets exhausting because it is a focused job and it's hard to stay current because there's always new people new products coming up who have newer tools and frankly more time because it's very intense is very focused tasks so sales skills actually scale better over time like for example if you have a reputation for building a great product that's good but

1:11:48when you ship your new product I'm gonna evaluate it based on the product but if you have a reputation for being a good person to do business with and you're persuasive and communicative then that reputation almost becomes self-fulfilling so I think if you only had to pick one you can start with building and then transition to selling this is a cop-out answer but I think that is actually the right answer before we go and talk about accountability and leverage and judgment you've got a few tweets further down the line that I would put in the category of continuous learning they're essentially there is no skill called business avoid business magazines in business class study microeconomics game theory psychology persuasion ethics mathematics

1:12:34and computers there's one other comment that you made in a periscope that was you should be able to pick up any book in the library and read it and the last tweet in this category was reading as faster than listening doing is faster than watching yeah the most important tweet on this I don't even have in here unfortunately which is the foundation of learning is reading I don't know a smart person who doesn't read and read all the time and the problem is what do I read how do I read because for most people to struggle it's it's short so the most important thing is just to learn how to educate yourself and the way to educate yourself is to develop

1:13:10a love for reading so the tweet that is left out the one that I was hinting yet is read what you love until you love to read it's that simple everybody I know who reads a lot loves to read and they love to read because they read books that they loved it's a little bit of a catch-22 but you want to start off just reading wherever you and then keep building up from there until reading becomes a habit and then eventually you will just get bored of a simple stuff so you may start off reading fiction then you might graduate the science fiction then you may graduate to nonfiction then you may graduate to science or philosophy or mathematics or whatever

1:13:45it is but take your natural path and just read the things that interest you until you understand them and then you'll naturally move to the next thing and the next thing in the next thing now there is an exception to this which is where I was hinting with what things you actually do want to learn which is at some point there's too much out there to read and even reading is full of junk there are actually things you can read especially early on that will program your brain a certain way and then later things that you read you will decide whether those things were true or false based on the earlier things so it is important that you read foundational things

1:14:18and foundational things I would say are the original books in a given field that are very scientific in their nature so for example instead of reading a business book pick up Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations instead of reading a book on biology or evolution that's written today I would pick up Darwin's Origin of Species instead of reading a book on biotech right now that may be very advanced I would just pick up the eighth day of creation by Watson and Crick instead of reading advanced books on what cosmology and what Neil deGrasse Tyson and Stephen Hawking have been saying you can pick up richard fineman six easy pieces and start with basic physics if you understand the basics especially in

1:14:57mathematics and physics and sciences then you will not be afraid of any book all of us have that memory of when we were sitting in class and we're learning mathematics and it was all logical and all made sense until at one point the class moved too fast and we fell behind and then after that we were left memorizing equations memorizing concepts without being able to drive them from first principles and that moment were lost because unless you're professional mathematicians you're not gonna remember those things all you're gonna remember are the techniques the foundations so you have to make sure that you're building on a steel frame of understanding because you're putting together a foundation for a skyscraper and you're not just

1:15:37memorizing things because if you're just memorizing things you're lost so the foundations are all true important and the ultimate the ultimat is when you walk into a library and you look at it up and down and you don't fear any book you know that you can take any book off the shelf you can read it you can understand it you can absorb what is true you can reject what is false and you have a basis for even working that out that is logical and scientific and not purely just based on opinions the beauty of the Internet is the entire Library of Alexandria times 10 is at your fingertips at all times it's not the means of education or the means of

1:16:15learning are scarce the means of learning are abundant it's the desire to learn that scarce so you really have to cultivate that desire and it's not even cultivating if to not lose it children have a natural curiosity if you go to a young child who's first learning language they're pretty much always asking what's this what's that why is this who's that they're always asking questions but one of the problems is that schools and our educational system and even our way of raising children replaces curiosity with compliance and once you replace the curiosity with the compliance you get an obedient factory worker but you no longer get a creative thinker and you need creativity you need that ability to feed your own

1:16:55brain to learn whatever you want and to me foundational things are principles there are algorithms they're deep-seated logical understanding where you can defend it or attack it from any angle and that's why microeconomics is important because macroeconomics a lot of memorization a lot of macro as Nassim Taleb says it is easier to macro than it is 2 micro because macroeconomics is boodoo complex science meets politics you can't find two macro economists to agree on anything these days and different macro economists get used by different politicians to peddle their different pet theories there are even macro economists out there now peddling something called modern monetary theory which says hey except for this pesky thing called inflation we can just print all the

1:17:39money that we want yes except for this pesky thing called inflation that's like saying instead of limited energy we can fire rockets off into space all day long it's just nonsense but the fact that there are people who have macroeconomists in their title and are peddling modern monetary theory just tells you that macroeconomics as a so-called science has been corrupted it's a branch of politics so you really want to focus on the foundations foundation the ultimate foundations are mathematics and logic if you understand logic and mathematics then you have the basis for understanding scientific method once you understand the scientific method then you can understand how to separate truth from falsehood in other fields and other things that you're reading so

1:18:21be very careful about reading other people's opinions and even be careful about reading facts because so-called facts are often just opinions but you know with a veneer around them what you really are looking for is algorithms but you're really looking for his understanding it's better to go through a book really slowly and struggled and stumbled and rewind then it is ticks fly through it quickly and say well now I read 20 books ever at 30 books I've read 50 books in the field it's like Bruce Lee said I don't fear the man who knows a thousand kicks and a thousand punches I fear the man who's practiced one punch ten thousand times or one kick 10,000 times it's the understanding that

1:19:00comes through repetition and three usage and through logic and foundations that really makes you a smart thinker to lay a foundation for learning for the rest of your life I think you need two things if I was gonna try and sum it up one practical persuasion and two you need to go deep in some technical category whether it's abstract math or you want to read Donald Knuth books on algorithms or you want to read fineman's lectures on physics if you have practical persuasion and a deep understanding of some complex topic I think you'll have a great foundation for learning for the rest of your life yeah if I can expand it a little bit I would say that the five most

1:19:48important skills are of course reading writing arithmetic and then as you are adding in persuasion we're just talking and then finally I would add computer programming just because it's an applied form of arithmetic that just gets you so much leverage for free in any domain that you operate in if you're good with computers if you're good at basic mathematics you're good at writing if you're good at speaking and if you like reading you're set for life so in that sense business to me is bottom of the barrel there's no actual skilled call business it's too generic of a thing it's like a skill called relating like relating to humans that's not a skill it's too broad so a lot of what

1:20:28goes on in business schools and there's some very intelligent stuff taught in business schools I don't need to track from them completely but some of the stuff that's trying Business School is essentially just anecdotes they call it case studies but it's just anecdotes and they're trying to help you pattern match by throwing lots of data points at you but the reality is you will never understand them fully until you're actually in that position yourself even then you will find that basic concepts from game theory and psychology and ethics and mathematics and computers and logic will serve you much much better so I would focus in the foundations I would focus with a science bent I would develop a love for reading

1:21:03including by reading so-called junk food that you're not supposed to read you don't have to read the classics that is the foundation for your self education what did you mean when you said that doing is faster than watching when you come to your learning curve if you want to optimize your learning curve one of the reasons why I don't love podcasts even though I'm a generator of podcasts is that I like to consume my information very quickly and now I'm a good reader a fast reader and I can read very fast but I can only listen at a certain speed I know people listen to 2x 3x but everyone sounds like a chipmunk and it's hard to go back it's hard

1:21:37to highlight it's hard to pinpoint snippets and save them in your notebook and so on similarly a lot of people think they can become really skilled at something by watching others do it or even by reading about others doing it and going back to business school case study that's a classy example you know they study other people's businesses but in reality you're going to learn a lot more about running a business by operating your own lemonade stand or equivalent or even opening a little retail store down the street that is how you gonna learn on the job because a lot of the subtleties don't express themselves until you're actually in the business for example everyone's now into mental models these days

1:22:13right you go to Farnam Street you go to poor Charlie's Almanac and you can learn all the different mental models but which ones matter more which ones do you apply more often which matter which circumstances that's actually the hard part for example my personal learning has been that the principal-agent problem drives so much in this world it's an incentives problem you know I've learned that tit-for-tat iterated prisoner's dilemma is the piece of game theory that is worth knowing the most you can literally almost put down the game theory book after that finally the best way to learn game theory is to play lots of games I never even read game theory books I consider myself extremely good at game theory I've

1:22:50never opened up a game theory book and found a result in there where I was like oh yeah that's common sense to me because the reason is I just grew up playing all kinds of games and I ran into all kinds of corner cases with all kinds of friends and so it's just second nature to me so you can always learn better by doing on the job but the doing is a subtle thing that we're doing in capsule it's a lot so for example let's say I want to learn how to run a business well if I start a business where I go in every day and I'm doing the same thing with Sam running the retail store that Street where I'm stocking the shelves with food and liquor every single day I'm not gonna learn that much because I'm repeating things a lot so I'm putting in thousands of hours but there are thousands of hours doing the same thing whereas if

1:23:33I was putting in thousands of iterations that would be different so the learning curve is across iteration so if I was trying new marketing experiments to store all the time I was constantly changing out the inventory I was constantly changing out the branding in the messaging I was constantly changing the sign I was constantly changing the online channels that I was used to drive foot traffic in I was experimenting with being open at different hours if I even had the ability to walk around and talk to other store owners and get in their books and figure out how they're running their it's the number of iterations that drives a learning curve so the more iterations you can have the more shots

1:24:07on goal you can have the faster you're going to learn it's not just about the hours put in it's actually a combination of the two but I think just the way we're built and the way that the world presents itself the world offers us very easily the opportunity to do the same thing over and over and over again but really we'd be better served if we went off and found ways to do new things from scratch and doing something new the first time is painful because you're wandering into unser territory and high odds are that you will fail so you just have to get very comfortable with frequent small failures you know Nassim Taleb and talks about this also he made

1:24:47his fortune his wealth by being a trader who relied upon black swans Nassim Taleb made money by essentially losing little bits of money every day and then once in a blue moon he would make a lot of money when the unthinkable happened for other people where's most people want to make little bits of money every day and in exchange they'll tolerate lots of blow-up risks they'll tolerate going completely bankrupt we're not involved to bleed a little bit every day if you're out in the natural environment and you get a cut and you're literally bleeding a little bit every day you will eventually die you have to stop that cut we're evolved for small victories all the time but that becomes very

1:25:25expensive that's where the crowd is that's where the herd is so if you're willing to bleed a little bit every day but in exchange you win big later you will do better that is by the way entrepreneurship entrepreneurs bleed every day they're not making money they're losing money they're constantly stressed out all the responsibilities upon them but when they win they win big on average they'll make more so why don't we jump into accountability which I thought was pretty interesting and I think you have your own unique take on so the first tweet on accountability was embrace accountability and take business risks under your own name Society will reward you with responsibility equity and leverage yeah so to get rich you

1:26:07know you're gonna need leverage and leverage comes in labor it comes in capital or it can come through code or media but most of these like labor and capital people have to give to you for labor somebody has to follow you for capital somebody has to give you money or assets to manage or machines so to get these things you to build up credibility and you have to do those under your own name as much as possible which is risky so accountability is a double-edged thing it allows you to take credit when things go well and to bear the brunt of the failure when things go badly so in that sense you know people who are stamping their names on things

1:26:40aren't foolish they're just confident maybe it turns out to be foolish in the end but if you look at a Kanye or an Oprah or a Trump or an Elon or anyone like that these people can get rich just off their name because their name is such powerful branding you know regardless what you think of Trump you have to realize that the guy was among the best in the world at just branding his name why would you go to Trump casino used to because Trump why would you go to Trump Tower because of Trump when it came time to vote I think that a lot of voters just went and said Trump they recognize the name so the name recognition paid

1:27:11off same thing with Oprah she puts her brand on something her name on something and it flies off the shelves and it's like instant validator but these people also take risks for putting their name out there obviously Trump is now probably hated by half or more than half of the country and by a big chunk of the world he sticks his name out there by putting your name out there you become a celebrity and fame has many many downsides it's better to be anonymous and rich than to be poor and famous but even famous and rich has a lot of downsides associated with it you're always in the public eye so accountability is quite important when you're working to build a

1:27:44product or you're working on a team or you're working in a business we are constantly drummed into our heads how important it is to be part of a team and absolutely agree with that a lot of our training socially is telling us to not stick our necks out of the crowd this is saying that I hear from Australian friends I like the tall poppy gets cut right don't stick your neck out but I would say that actually a really really well functioning team is small and has clear accountability for each two different portions like so you can say okay this person is responsible for building the product this person is responsible for the messaging this person is responsible for raising money

1:28:21this person responsible for the pricing strategy and maybe their online advertising so if somebody screws up you know exactly who's responsible what at the same time something goes really well you also know exactly who's responsible so if you have a small team and you have clearly delineated responsibilities then you can still keep a very high level of accountability and accountability is really important because when something succeeds or fails if it fails everybody points fingers at each other and if it succeeds everybody steps forward to take credit and we've all had that experience when we were in school and we got like a group assignment to do and there were people in there there were probably a few people in there who

1:28:58did a lot of the work and then there are few people who just did a lot of grandstanding or to do the work so we're all familiar with this from a childhood sense but it is uncomfortable to talk about but clear accountability is important without accountability you don't have incentives without accountability you can't build credibility but you take risk so you take risk of failure you take risk of humiliation you take risk of failure under your own name which you know luckily in modern society there's no more debtors prison and people don't go to jail or get executed for losing other people's money but we're still socially hardwired to not fail in public under our own names and the people who

1:29:32have the ability to fail in public under their own names actually gain a lot of power for example I'll give a personal anecdote up until about 2013 2014 my public persona was entirely around startups and investing and only around 2014-2015 did I start talking about philosophy and psychological things and broader things and it made me a little nervous because I was doing it under my own name and there were definitely people in the industry who sent me messages through the back channel like what are you doing you're ending your career this is stupid and I just went with it took a risk same with crypto early on it took a risk but when you put your name out there you take

1:30:09a risk with certain things you also get to reap the rewards you get the benefits accountability is important because that's how you're going to get leverage that's how you're going to get credibility it's also how you're going to get equity you're gonna get a piece of the business when you're negotiating with other people ultimately if someone else is making a decision about how to compensate you that decision will be based on how replaceable you are and if you have high accountability that makes you less replaceable and then they have to give you equity which is a piece of the upside but equity itself is a good example because equity is also a risk based instrument equity means you get paid everything

1:30:47after all the people who need guaranteed money are paid back so if you look at the hierarchy of capital in a company the employees get paid first they get to pay the salary first like in the legal proceedings you know the salaries are sacrosanct if you are a board member and the company spends too much money and has back salaries to pay the government will go after you personally to pay back the salaries so the employees get the most security but in exchange for that security they don't have as much upside then next in line would be the debt holders who are maybe the bankers who lent money to the company for operations and they need to make their fixed coupon

1:31:26every month or every year but they don't get much more upside beyond that now they might be making 5 10 15 20 25 % a year but that's where they're upset is limited to and then finally are the equity holders and these people are actually gonna get most of the upside so once the debt holders are paid off and the salaries are paid off whatever remains goes to them but if there isn't enough money to pay off the salaries and the debt holders or if there's just enough to pay off the salary the debt holders which is what happens with most businesses most of the times the equity holders get nothing so the equity holders take on greater risk but then

1:31:59they take on in exchange they get nearly unlimited upside and you can do the same with all of your work so essentially taking accountability for your actions is the same as taking an equity position in all of your work you're essentially taking greater downside risk and greater upside risk but realize that in modern society the downside risk is not that large you know even personal bankruptcy can wipe the debts clean in good ecosystems I'm most familiar with Silicon Valley but generally people will forgive failures as long as you are honest and made a high integrity effort so there's not really that much to fear in terms of failure and so people should be taking on a lot more accountability than they

1:32:38actually are is accountability actually fragile or do you really just mean that we're hardwired not to fail in public so it just feels like it's a fragile thing I think it could actually be fragile like example of accountability is you're an airplane pilot but as a captain you're taking on accountability for the entire plane let's say that something goes wrong with the aircraft you can't literal a mitt on anyone else you can't blame it on the steward or the stewardess you can't blame it on the you're the captain you're responsible for the ship and if you screw up you crash the ship and there are immediate consequences in the old days you know the captain was expected to go down with

1:33:15the ship if the ship was sinking literally the last person who got to get off was the captain so yeah I think accountability does come with real risks but we're talking about in a business context so the risk here would be that you would probably be the last one to get your capital back out you'd be the last one to get paid for your time so you know the time that you put in the capital that you put in into the company these are what are at risk even if a business fails then your names on it that's not as bad as if it turns out to be an integrity issue like your Bernie Madoff for example Madoff investments that name

1:33:47is never going to be good again in the investment community you could be Bernie Madoff's great-great-great-grandson you're not gonna go into the investment business cuz you ruin the family name so I think these days the accountability risk with the name happens more around integrity rather than it does around purely economic failure the big takeaway for me on accountability is that you will be rewarded directly in proportion with your accountability I also think this is why people like tala rail against CEOs who get rewards without accountability yeah I mean Telep skin in the game is required reading if you want to get anywhere in Modern Life and understand how modern systems work then a scale of the game would be near top

1:34:30of my list to read but yes accountability skin of the game these concepts go very closely I think of accountability as reputational skin in the game it's putting your personal reputation on the line as skin in the game accountability is a simple concept the only part of accountability that may be a little counterintuitive is that we're currently socially brainwashed to not take on accountability not in a visible way but I think there are ways to take on accountability where every member of a team can take on accountability for their portion and that is how you get a well-functioning team while still putting credits and losses in the correct columns so why don't we talk a little bit about leverage the first

1:35:12tweet in the storm was a famous quote from Archimedes which was give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth the next tweet was fortunes require leverage business leverage comes from capital people and products with no marginal costs of replication leverage is critical the reason I stuck in Archimedes quote in there is normally I don't like putting other people's quotes in my Twitter like that doesn't add any value you can go look up those people's quotes but this court I had to put in there because it's just so fundamental I read it when I was very very young and it had a huge impression on me and we all know what leverage is

1:35:50when we use a seesaw or a lever we understand how that works physically but I think what our brains aren't really well evolved to comprehend is how much leverage is possible in modern society and what the newest forms of leverage are and so the oldest form of leverage is labor which is people working for you so instead of me lifting rocks I can have 10 people lift rocks then just by my guidance and where the rocks should go a lot more rocks get moved and I could do myself everybody understands this because we're evolved to understand the labor a form of leverage and so what happens is society overvalues labour as a form of leverage this is why your parents are

1:36:28impressed when you get a promotion and you have lots of people working underneath you this is why when a lot of naive people we tell them about your company they'll say how many people work there they'll use that as a way to establish credibility they're trying to measure how much leverage and impact you actually have or when someone starts a movement they'll say how many people they have or how big the army is we just automatically assume that more people is better but I would argue that this is the worst form of leverage that you could possibly use managing other people is incredibly messy it requires tremendous leadership skills you're one short hop from a mutiny or getting eaten or torn

1:37:01apart by the mob it's incredibly competed over entire civilizations have been destroyed over this fight for example communism Marxism is all about the battle between capital and labor that's capital law and that's labor right so it's a trap so you really want to stay out of labor based leverage you want the minimum amount of people working with you that are going to allow you to use the other forms of leverage but HR you are much more interesting the second type of leverage is capital and this one's a little less hardwired into us because large amounts of money moving around and being saved and being invested in money markets these are inventions of human beings the last few hundred to few thousand

1:37:41years they're not evolved with us from hundreds of thousands of years so we understand them a little bit less well they probably require more intelligence to use correctly and the ways in which we use them keep changing management skills from a hundred years ago might still apply to but investing in the stock market skills from a hundred years ago probably don't apply to the same level today so capital is a trickier form of leverage to you this poor modern it's the one that people have used to get fabulously wealthy in the last century it's probably been the dominant form of leverage in the last century and you can see this by who are the richest people it's bankers politicians and corrupt

1:38:16countries who print money especially people who move large amounts of money around and if you look at the top of very large companies outside of technology companies in many many large old companies the CEO job is really a financial job they're really financial asset managers now sometimes an asset measuring can put a pleasant face on it so you get a Warren Buffett type but deep down I think we all dislike capital as a form of leverage because it feels unfair because it's this invisible thing that can be accumulated and passed across generations and suddenly seems to result in people having gargantuan amounts of money with nobody else kind of around them or Nestle sharing in it that said Capital is a

1:38:58powerful form of leverage it can be converted to labor it can be converted to other things it's very surgical very analytical if you are a brilliant investor and give a billion dollars and you can make a 30 percent return with it where's anybody else can only make a 20 percent return you're gonna get all the money and you're gonna get paid very handsomely for it it scales very very well if you get good at managing capital you can manage more and more capital much more easy they can manage more and more people so it is a good form of leverage but the hard part of capital is how do you obtain it and that's why I talked about specific knowledge and

1:39:31accountability first if you have specific knowledge in a domain and if you're accountable and you have a good name in that domain then people are going to give you capital as a form of leverage that you can use to then go get more capital so but capital also is fairly well understood and I think a lot of the knocks against capitalism come because of the accumulation of capital the most interesting and the most important form of leverage is this idea of products that have no marginal cost of replication this is the new form of leverage this was only invented in the last few hundred years it got started with the printing press and accelerated broadcast media and now it's really blown

1:40:07up with the internet with code so now you can multiply you or efforts without having to involve other humans and without needing money from other humans this podcast is a form of leverage long ago I would have had to sit in a lecture hall and lecture each of you personally and I would have maybe reached a few hundred people and that would have been that 30 years ago I would have to be lucky to get on TV which is somebody else's leverage they would have distorted the message that would taken the economics out of it or charged me for it they would have muddled the message and I would have been lucky to get that form of leverage but today thanks

1:40:38to the internet I can buy a cheap microphone hook it up to a laptop or an iPad and there you are all so this newest form of leverage is where all the new fortunes were made so all the new billionaires the last generation fortunes were made by capital that was a warren buffett's of the world but the new generation fortunes are all made through code or media Joe Rogan making 50 to 100 million bucks a year from his podcast PewDiePie I don't know how much money he's rolling in but he's bigger than the news right the fortnight players of course Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg and Larry Page and Sergey Brin and Bill Gates and Steve Jobs that is all code

1:41:16based leverage now the beauty is when you combine all of these three that's where tech startups really excel where you take just the minimum but highest output labor that you can get which are engineers and designers product developers and then you add in use that for marketing advertising scaling and you add in lots of code and media and podcasts and content to get it all out there that is a magic combination and that's why you see technology startups explode out of nowhere use massive leverage and just make huge outside returns do you want to talk a little bit about permissioned versus permissionless probably the most interesting thing to keep in mind about the new forms of leverage is their permission less

1:42:02they don't require somebody else's permission for you to use them or succeed for labor leverage somebody has to decide to follow you for capital leverage somebody has to give you money to invest or to turn into a product but coding writing books recording podcasts tweeting youtubing these kinds of things these are permissionless you don't need anyone's permission to do them and that's why they're very terian they're great equalizers of leverage and as much as people may rail on Facebook and YouTube they're not gonna stop using it because this permissionless leverage where everyone can be a broadcaster it's just too good the same way you know you can rail upon Apple for having a slightly closed ecosystem in the iPhone but everyone's

1:42:41writing apps for it and so as long as you can write apps for it you can get rich or reach users doing that why not I think of all the forms of leverage the best one in modern society and people gonna this is glib this is a little overused but and this is why I tell people learn to code right it's that we have this idea that in the future there's gonna be these robots and they're gonna be doing everything and that may be true but I would say the majority the robot revolution has already happened the robots are already here and there are way more robots than they're humans it's just that we packed them in data centers for heat

1:43:12and efficiency reasons we put them in servers they're inside the computers all the circuits it's a robot mind inside that's doing all the work and so every great software developer for example now has an army of robots working for him at nighttime while he or she sleeps after they've written the code and it's just cranking away so the robots army is already here the robot revolution has already happened we're about halfway through it we're just adding in much more of the hardware component these days as we get more familiar we get more comfortable with the idea of autonomous vehicles and autonomous airplanes an autonomous ships and maybe autonomous trucks and you know their delivery BOTS and Boston Dynamics robots and all

1:43:50that but robots who are doing web searching for you for example are already here you know the ones who are like cleaning up your video and audio and transmitting it around the world are already here the ones who are answering many customer service queries things that you would have had to call human for are already here so an army of robots is already here it's very cheaply available and the bottleneck is just figuring out intelligent and interesting things to do to them and essentially you can order this army of robots around just the commands have to be issued in a computer language in the language that they understand so these robots aren't very smart they have to be told very precisely

1:44:25what to do and how to do it so coding is such a great superpower because now you can speak the language of the robot armies and you can tell them what to do and I think at this point actually people are not only commanding the arm robots within servers through code they're actually manipulating the movement of trucks of other people just ordering a package on Amazon you're manipulating the movement of many people and many robots they get a package delivered to you people are doing the same things to build businesses now so there's the army of robots within servers and then there's also an army of actual robots and people that are being manipulated through software labor and capital are much

1:45:06less egalitarian not just in their inputs but in their outputs let's say that I need something that humans have to provide like if I want a massage or if I need like someone to cook my food the more of a human element there is in providing that service the less egalitarian it is Jeff Bezos probably has much better vacations and most of us right because he has lots of humans running around doing whatever he needs to do but if you look at the output of code in media Jeff Bezos doesn't get to watch better movies and TV than we do Jeff Bezos doesn't get to even have a better computing experience like Google doesn't give him some premium special Google account

1:45:42where his searches are better it's the nature of code and media output that the same product is accessible to everybody and it turned into a positive sum game where if Jeff Bezos is consuming the same product as a thousand other people that products would be better than the version that Jeff would consume on his own whereas with other products that's not true if you look at something like buying a Rolex which is no longer about telling time it's a signalling good it's all about showing off I have a Rolex that's a zero-sum game if everybody in the world is wearing a Rolex then people don't want to wear Rolex is anymore because they're no longer signal it's canceled out the effect

1:46:17and so rich people do have an advantage in consuming that product they'll just price it up till only they can have Rolexes and then poor people can have relaxes and relaxes resume they're signalling value but something like watching Netflix or using Google or using Facebook or YouTube or even frankly modern-day cars like rich people don't have better cars they just have weirder cars you can't drive a Lamborghini on the street at any speed that makes sense for a Lamborghini so it's actually a worse car in the street it just turned into a signaling good at that point your sweet spot where you want to be is somewhere like a Tesla Model 3 or like Carola is an amazing car a new

1:46:55Toyota Corolla is a really nice car but because it's mainstream the technology has amortized the cost of production over the largest number of consumers possible and the best products tend to be at the center at the sweet spot the middle-class rather than being targeted at the upper-class so I think one of the things that we don't necessarily is as the forms of leverage have gone from being human based labour based and being capital based to being more product in code and media base that most of the goods and services that we consume are becoming much more egalitarian in their consumption even food is becoming that way like food is becoming cheap and abundant at least in the first world too much

1:47:31so to our detriment Jeff Bezos isn't Nestle eating better of food he's just eating different food or he's eating like food that's prepared and served fee at Wrigley so it's almost like more again that human element performance but the labor element out of food production has gone down massively the capital element has gone down massively and so even food production itself has become more technology oriented and so the gap between the haves and the have-nots is getting smaller so if you care about ethics in wealth creation it is better to create your wealth using code and media as leverage because then those products are equally available to everybody as opposed to trying to create your wealth through labor or capital because

1:48:10what I'm referring to here is scale economies technology products and media products have such amazing scale economies that you always want to use the product that is used by the most people the one that's used by the most people ends up having the largest budget there's no marginal cost of adding another user and so with the largest budget you get the highest quality so the best TV shows are actually not gonna be some obscure ones just made for a few rich people they're gonna be the big budget ones like the game of thrones with the Breaking Bad or bird box where they have massive massive budgets they can just use those budgets to get to a certain quality level and then

1:48:48the rich people to be different they have to fly to Sundance and watch a documentary because you and I aren't gonna fly the Sundance because you know that's something that bored rich people do to show off and we're not gonna watch a documentary because Muslims aren't actually even that good right again if you're wealthy today for large classes of things you spend your money on signaling goods to show other people that you're wealthy and you try and convert them to status as opposed to actually consuming the goods for their own sake people and capital as a form of leverage have a negative externality and code and product have a positive externality attached to them if I was going to sum up

1:49:25your point I think that capital and labor are also starting to become a little more permissionless or at least the permissioning is diffuse because of the internet so instead of labour we have community now which is diffused form of labour for example Mark Zuckerberg has a billion people doing work for him by using Facebook and instead of going to raise capital from someone who's rich now we have crowdfunding so you can raise millions and millions of dollars for a charity for a health problem or for a business you can do it all online so capital and labor are also becoming permissionless and you don't need to necessarily do it the old-fashioned way where you have to go around and ask people

1:50:09for permission to use their money or their time one more question about leverage do you think a choice of business model or our choice of product can also bring a kind of leverage to it for example pursuing a business that has Network effects pursuing a business that has brand effects or other choices of business model that people could manipulate that just give you free leverage yeah there's some really good micro economic concepts that are important to understand one of those are scale economies which is the more you produce is something the cheaper it gets to make it that's something that a lot of businesses have basic economics 101 and you should try and get into a business we're making widget number

1:50:5112 is cheaper than making widget number 5 and making widget number 10,000 is a lot cheaper than the previous ones and this builds up an automatic sort of barrier to entry against competition and getting commoditized so that's an important one another one this is along the same lines but technology products especially and media products have this great quality where they have zero marginal cost of reproduction so creating another copy what you just created is free so when somebody listens this podcast or watches a YouTube video up this it doesn't cost me anything but the next person who shows up those zero marginal cost things they take a while to get going because you make very little money per user but over

1:51:29time they can really really add up so Joe Rogan is working no harder on his current podcast and he wasn't podcast number one but on podcast number 1100 he's making a million dollars for the podcast where's for the previous one he probably lost money for the first one that's an example of zero marginal cost and then the most subtle but the most important is this idea of network effects and it comes from computer networking Bob Metcalfe who created Ethernet famously coined Metcalfe's law which is the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of nodes in the network so if network of size 10 would have a value of a hundred network of a size 100 would

1:52:07have a value of 10,000 it's not just 10x more it's a hundred X more because a square so the difference is the square so you want to be in a network effects business assuming you're not number two if you're number one in network effect business you win everything so example if you look at Facebook right your friends and family social networking protocol who's your competitor nobody because they want everything through network effects which is why when people say well I can just switch away from Facebook they don't realize that network effects create natural monopolies they're very very powerful things and one of the dirty secrets of Silicon Valley is that a lot of the winning businesses are natural monopolies even dried

1:52:44sharing tends towards one winner-take-all system like uber will always have better economics and lyft as long as it's moving more drivers and more writers around something like Google there's the only one Bible search engine I do like DuckDuckGo you know privacy reasons but they're just always gonna be behind because of network effects twitter right where else would you go for micro blogging even YouTube has a weak network effects but they're still powerful enough there's really no number-two site that you go to to consume your video on a regular basis it even turns out in detail Amazon Prime and convenience store credit cards and information creates a powerful network effect so what is the network effect let's define it precisely a network

1:53:23effect is when each additional user adds value to the existing user base so your users themselves are creating some value for the existing users the classic example that I think everybody can understand is language let's say that there's a hundred people live in the community and speak ten different languages and each person just speaks one of those ten well you're having to translate all the time it's incredibly painful but if all hundred of you spoke the same language it would add tremendous value and so the way that community will play out is ten people start out speaking ten languages let's say that one extra person limbs English well now all of a sudden eleven people know English so that the next

1:54:02person comes in to learn new language probably gonna choose English at some point let's say English gets a twenty or twenty-five people it's done it's just gonna own the entire language marketplace and the rest of the languages will get competed out which is why long term the entire world is probably gonna end up speaking English in Chinese China is closed off on the internet but the Internet itself is a great leveler and people who want to communicate on the Internet are forced to speak English because the largest community of people on the Internet speaks English I always feel bad for my colleagues who grew up speaking foreign languages in foreign countries because you don't have access to so many books so

1:54:36many books just haven't been translated into other languages so if you only spoke French or you only spoke German or you only spoke Hindi for example you would be at a severe disadvantage in a technical education invariably if you go and get a technical education you have to learn English just because you have to read these books that have this data that has not been translated so languages are probably the oldest example of network effect money is another example we should all probably be using the same money except for the fact that Geographic and regulatory boundaries have created these artificial islands of money but even then the world tends to use a single currency as the reserve currency at most times

1:55:12currently the US dollar so network affects a very powerful concept when you're picking a business model it's really good idea to pick a model where you can benefit from network effects low marginal costs and scale economies and these tend to go together like anything that has zero marginal cost of production obviously has scale economies and things that have zero marginal cost every productions very often tend to have Network effects because it doesn't cost you anything more to stamp out the thing so then you can just create little hooks for users to add value to each other you should always be thinking about how your users your customers can add value to each other because that is the ultimate form of leverage

1:55:51you're in the beach of the Bahamas or you're sleeping at night and your customers are adding value to each other tweet storm is very abstract it's deliberately meant to be broadly applicable to all kinds of different domains and disciplines and time periods and places but sometimes it's hard to work without concrete example so let's just go concrete for a minute look at the real estate business you could start at the bottom let's say you're a day laborer you come in you fix people's houses someone orders you around tells you break that piece of rock send that piece of wood put that thing over there there's all these menial jobs that go on in a construction site if you're working one of

1:56:30those jobs unless you're a skilled trade like say a carpenter or electrician you don't really have specific knowledge and even carpenter electrician is not that specific because other people can be trained how to do it so you can be replaced so you get paid your fifteen twenty twenty-five fifty if you're really lucky 75 dollars an hour but that's about it you don't have any leverage other than from the tools that you're using so if you're driving a bulldozer that's better than doing it with your hands so daily labor in India makes a lot less because they have no tool leverage you don't have much accountability you're a faceless cog and the construction crew and the owner of the house or the

1:57:02buyer the house doesn't know or care that you worked on it one step up from that you might have a contractor like a general contractor who someone hires to come and fix and repair and build up their house that general contractor is taking accountability they're taking responsibility so now if let's say they got paid two and fifty thousand dollars for a job so I'm using barrier prices so go arrest the world price $100,000 for the job to fix up a house and it actually cost the general contractor all said and done $70,000 well that contractors gonna pocket that remaining thirty so they got the upside they got the equity but they're also taking accountability and risk so if the project runs

1:57:39over and there's losses then they eat the losses but you see be just the accountability gives them some form of additional potential income and then they also have labor leverage because they have a bunch of people working for them but it probably tops out right there you can go one level above that and you can look at a property developer this might be someone who is a contractor who did a bunch of houses did a really good job then decided to go into business for themselves and they go around looking for beaten down properties that have potential they buy them they either raise money from investors they're fronted themselves they fix the place up they sell it for twice what they

1:58:14bought it for maybe they only put in 20% more so it's a healthy profit so now a developer like that takes on more accountability has more risk they're more specific knowledge because now you have to know which neighborhoods are worth buying in which Lots are actually good and which Lots are bad what makes or breaks a specific property you have to imagine the finished house that's gonna be there even when the property itself might look really bad right now so there's more specific knowledge there's more accountability and risk and now you also have capital leverage because you're also putting money into the project but conceivably you could buy you know a piece of land or a broken-down house for $200,000 and

1:58:49turn it into a million-dollar mansion and pocket all the difference one level beyond that might be a famous architect or a developer we're just having your name on a property because you've done so many great properties increases its value one level up from that you might be a person who decides well I understand real estate and I now know enough of the dynamics of real estate that rather than just build and flip my own properties or improve my own properties I'm gonna be a massive developer I'm gonna build entire communities another person might say I like that leverage but I don't want to manage all these people I want to do it more through capital so I'm gonna start a real

1:59:24estate investment trust and that requires specific knowledge not just about investing in real estate and building real estate but also requires specific knowledge about the financial markets and the capital markets and how real estate trusts operate one level beyond that might be somebody who says actually I want to bring the maximum leverage to bear in this market and the maximum specific knowledge and so that person would say well I understand real estate and I understand everything from basic housing construction to building properties and selling them to how real estate markets move and thrive and I also understand the technology business so I understand how to recruit developers how to write code and how to build that product and I understand how

2:00:03to raise money from venture capitalists and how to return it now what that works and obviously not a single person may know this you may pull a team together to do it where each have different skill sets but that combined entity would have specific knowledge in technology and in real estate it would have massive accountability because that company's name would be a very high risk high reward effort attached to the whole thing and people would devote their lives to it take on significant risk and then it would have leverage in code with lots of developers it would have capital with investors putting money and the founders own capital and it would have labor of some of the highest quality labor that

2:00:39you can find which is high quality engineers and designers and marketers who are working on the company and then you may end up with a Trulia or a read fan or Zillow kind of company and then the upside could potentially be in the billions of dollars or the hundreds of millions of dollars so as you layer in more and more kinds of knowledge that can only be gained on the job and aren't common knowledge and you layer in more and more accountability and risk-taking and you layer in more and more great people working on it and more and more capital on it and more and more code and media on it you keep expanding the scope of the opportunity all the

2:01:11way from the day laborer who might just literally be scrapping on the ground with their hands all the way up to somebody who started a real estate tech company and then took it public we spoke about specific knowledge we talked about accountability we talked about leverage the last skill that navall talks about in his tweet storm is judgment where he says that leverage is a force multiplier for your judgment we are now living in an age of nearly infinite leverage and all the great fortunes are created through leverage so your first job is to go and obtain leverage and you can obtain leverage through permission by taking risks and getting people to work for you or by raising capital or you

2:01:53can get leverage permissionless lee by learning how to code or becoming good communicator and podcasting and broadcasting creating videos writing etc so that's how you get leverage but once you have leverage what do you do with it well the first part a career spent hustling to get leverage once you have the leverage then you want to slow down a bit because your judgment really matters it's like you've gone from steering your sailboat around to now you're steering an ocean liner or a tanker you have a lot more at risk but you have a lot more to gain as well you're carrying a much higher payload so in an age of infinite leverage judgment becomes the most important skill Warren Buffett is

2:02:29so wealthy now because of his judgment even if you were to take away all of Warren's money tomorrow investors would come out of the woodwork and hand him 100 billion dollars because they know his judgment is so good they would give him a big chunk of that hundred billion dollars to invest so ultimately everything else that you do is actually setting you up to apply your judgment one of the big things that people rail on a CEO pay and for sure there's crony capitalism that goes on where these CEOs control their boards and the boards give them too much money but there are certain CEOs who definitely earn their keep because their judgment is better if you're steering a big ship

2:03:03if you're steering Google or Apple and your judgment is 10 or 20 percent better than the next person's Society will literally pay you hundreds of millions of dollars more because you're steering a hundred billion dollar ship if you're on course ten or twenty percent of the time more often the other person the compounding results on that hundreds of billions of dollars you're managing will be so large that your CEO pay will be dwarfed in comparison so demonstrated judgment credibility around the judgment is so critical Warren Buffett wins here because he has massive credibility he's been highly accountable he's been right over and over in the public domain he's built a reputation for very high integrity so you can trust him so

2:03:45a person like that people will throw infinite leverage behind him because of his judgment nobody asked him how hard he works nobody asked him when he wakes up or when he goes to sleep did like Warren just do your thing so especially demonstrated judgment with high accountability clear track record is critical let's define judgment I would define it as knowing the long-term effects of your decisions or being able to predict the long-term affects your decisions it's funny my definition of wisdom is knowing the long-term consequences of your actions they're not all that different wisdom is just judgment on a personal domain wisdom applied to external problems I think is judgment so they're they're highly linked but yes it's knowing the long-term

2:04:30consequences of your actions and then making kind of the right decision to capitalize on that judgment is very hard to build up this is where both intellect and experience come into play there are many problems with the intellectuals in the ivory tower but one of the reasons why I must seem tell them rails against them is because they have no skin in the game they have no real-world experience right so they just apply purely into and intellect without any experience is often worse than useless because you get the confidence that the intellect gives you and you get some of the credibility but because you had no skin in the game and you had no real experience and no real accountability you're

2:05:05just throwing darts the real world is always far far more complex than we can intellectualize and especially all the interesting fast-moving edge domains and problems you can't get there without experience so if you are smart and you iterate fast it's not even you put 10,000 hours into something but you take 10,000 tries at something if you are smart and you have a lot of quick iterations and you try to keep your emotions out of it the people with the best judgement are actually among the least emotional a lot of the best investors are considered almost robotic in that regard but I would be surprised if even the best entrepreneurs often come across as unemotional there is this archetype of the passionate

2:05:45entrepreneur and yeah they have to care about what they're doing but they also have to see very clearly what's actually happening and the thing that prevents you from seeing what's actually happening or your emotions our emotions are constantly clouding our judgment and investing or in running companies or in building products or being entrepreneur emotions really get in the way emotions that were preventing you from seeing what's actually happening until you can no longer resist the truth of what's happening until it becomes too sudden and then you're forced into suffering which is a breaking of this emotional fantasy that you would put together to try and connect some of these concepts I would say that first you're accountable for your judgement judgment

2:06:26is the exercise of wisdom comes from experience and that experience can be accelerated through short iterations and the reason why a lot of the top investors a lot of the value investors if you read Jeremy Grantham where you read Warren Buffett you know you read up on Michael burry these people sound like philosophers or they are philosophers or they're reading a lot of history books or science books like what are they doing shouldn't they be reading investment books no investment books or the worst place to learn about investment because investment is a real-world activity that is highly multivariate all the advantages are always being competed away it's always in the cutting edge what you actually just need is very very broad-based

2:07:08judgment and thinking and the best way to do that is to study everything including a lot of philosophy and philosophy also makes you more stoic makes you less emotional and so you make better decisions you have better judgment one simple thing is I see that go ahead on Twitter and it seems like half of Twitter is outrageous something at all times you can go within someone's Twitter feed and get at least some semblance of what it must be like to be in their head all the time and the more outrage somebody is I guarantee you the worse their judgment is if someone's constantly tweeting political outrage and it seems like an angry person getting into fights you don't want to hand

2:07:44these person the keys to your car let alone the keys to your company so we covered the skills that you need to get rich that was specific knowledge accountability leverage judgment and lifelong learning let's talk a little bit about the importance of working hard and valuing your time so no one is going to value you more than you value yourself so you just have to set a very high personal hourly rate and you have to stick to it so even since when I was young I just decided that I was worth a lot more than the market thought I was worth but I started treating myself that way so always factor your time into every decision how much time does it

2:08:26take oh it's gonna take me an hour to get across town to get this thing well I value myself at $100 an hour that's throwing hundred dollars out of my pocket am I gonna do that you buy something from Amazon they screwed it up you have to return it is it worth your time to return it is it worth the mental hassle keep in mind that you have less work hours you have less mentally high-output hours do you want to use them to run errands and solve little problems or do you want to save them for the big stuff all the great scientists were terrible at managing their household life none of them had a clean organized room or you know

2:08:58made all their social events on time or sent their thank-you cards you can spend your life however you want but if you want to get rich it has to be your number one overwhelming desire which means that it has to come before anything else which means you can't be penny-pinching this is what people understand you can penny pinch your way to the basic sustenance you can keep your expenses low maybe retire early and not spend too that's perfectly valid but we're here to talk about wealth creation and if you're gonna do that then that has to be your number one overwhelming priority so fast-forward to your wealthy self and pick some intermediate hourly rate for me believe it or not back

2:09:32when you could have hired me which now obviously can't but back when you could have hired me and this was true a decade ago or even two decades ago before I had any real money my hourly rate I used to say to myself over and over is $5,000 an hour today and when I look back really it was about $1,000 an hour and of course I still ended up doing stupid things like arguing with the electrician or returning the broken speaker but I shouldn't have and I did a lot less than any of my friends would and I would make a theatrical show out of throwing something in the trash pile or giving to Salvation Army rather than trying to return

2:10:03it or handing something to people rather than trying to fix it I would argue with my girlfriends and even today to my wife like I don't do that that's not a problem that I solve I still argued that with my mother when she hands me like little to do's I just don't do that I would rather hire you an assistant and this was true even when I didn't have money another way of thinking about something is if you can outsource something or not do something for less than your hourly rate outsource it or don't do it so if you can hire someone to do it for less than your hourly rate hire them that even includes things like cooking now if

2:10:31you may want to eat your healthy home-cooked meals but if you can outsource it do that instead and I know some people will say well what about the joy of life and what about getting it right just your way sure you can do that but you're not gonna be wealthy because now you've made something else a priority Paul Graham said it pretty well for Y Combinator startups you said you should be working on your product and getting product market fit and you should be exercising and eating healthy like that's about it that's kind of all you have time for while you're on this mission so set a very high hourly aspirational rate for yourself and stick to it and it should

2:11:00seem and feel absurdly high if it doesn't it's not high enough and whatever you picked on my advice to you would be raise it like I said for myself even before I had money for the longest time I use five thousand dollars an hour and if you extrapolate that out into what it looks like his annual salary its multiple millions of dollars per year ironically I actually think I've beaten it but I look back because I'm not the hardest-working person I'm actually kind of a lazy person so I worked through bursts of energy where I'm really motivated with something so if I actually look at how much I've earned per actual hour that I put in is probably quite a bit

2:11:30higher than that let's talk about hard work there's this battle that happens in Twitter a lot between should you work hard and should you not like David Hauser's on there saying it's like your slave driving people and Keith Robo is always on there saying like know all the great founders work their fingers to the bone and they're talking past each other first of all they're talking about two different things David is talking about employees in a lifestyle business which is fine your number one thing in life if you're doing that is not getting wealthy you have a job you also have your family you also have your life but Keith is talking about the Olympics of startups he's talking about the

2:12:01person going for the gold medal and trying to build a multi-billion dollar public company that person has to get everything right they have to have great judgment they have to pick the right thing to work on they have to recruit the right team and they have to work crazy hard because they're basically engaged in a competitive sprint so if getting wealthy is your goal you are going to have to work as hard as you can but hard work is absolutely no substitute for who you work with and what you work on what you work on is probably the most important thing finding product market founder fit to expand on Marc Andreessen definition he came with product market fit but I would

2:12:36add product market founder fit which is how well you are personally suited to that business the combination that three that should be your overwhelming goal and you can save yourself a lot of time if you pick the right area to work in picking the right people to work with is the next most important piece and then third comes how hard you work but they're like three legs of a stool if you shortchange in any one of them the whole stool is gonna fall down so it's not like you can pick one over the other that easily so the order operations when you're building a business is or even building your career is first figure out what should I be doing what

2:13:10is something where there is a market that is emerging there's a product that I can build that I'm excited to work on and something where I have specific knowledge and I'm really into it and then second surround yourself with the best people possible and no matter how high your bar is raise your bar because you can never be working with other people who are great enough if there's someone greater out there to work with you should go work with them I advise a lot of people who are looking at which started to join in Silicon Valley I say basically pick the one that's going to have the best alumni network for you in the future look at the PayPal mafia they

2:13:40work with a bunch of geniuses so they all got rich so just try and pick based on the highest intelligence energy and integrity people that you can find and then finally once you have picked the right thing to work on and the right people to work with then you work as hard as you can this is where the mythology gets a little crazy people will work 1820 hour weeks a lot of that's just status signaling it's showing off nobody really works 80 200 20 hours a week sustained at high output with mental clarity your brain breaks down you just won't have good ideas so really the way people tend to work most effectively especially in knowledge work is they sprint as

2:14:18hard as they can while they're working on something and they're inspired and they're passionate and then they rest to take long breaks it's more like a lion hunting and much less like a marathon running and running so you sprint then you rest you reassess and then you try again in which you end up doing is you end up building a marathon of Sprint's maybe just made the point to me on the side that inspiration is perishable which is a very good point when you have your inspiration do it right then and there this happens to me a lot with my tweet storms I've actually come up with a whole bunch of additional tweets Donna decides the ones that are already out

2:14:48there but sometimes I just hesitate or I just pause and then it just dies and what I've learned is if I'm inspired to write a blog post or to publish a tweet storm I should probably do it right away otherwise it's not gonna get out there I won't come back to it so inspiration is a beautiful and powerful thing and when you have it just seize it so people talk about impatience when do you know to be impatient when you know to be patient my glib tweet on this was impatience with actions and patience with the results and I think that's actually a good philosophy for life anything you have to do just get it why wait you're not getting any

2:15:21younger your life is slipping away you don't want to spend it waiting in line you don't want to spend it traveling back and forth you don't want to spend it doing things that you know ultimately aren't part of your mission and when you do them you want to do them as quickly as you can while you do them well with your full attention but then you just have to give up on the results you have to be patient with the results because you deal with complex systems you didn't with lots of people it takes a long time for markets to adopt products it takes time for people to get comfortable working with each other it takes time for great products to

2:15:51emerge as you polish away polish away polish away so impatience with actions patience with results and as may be said inspiration is perishable so when you have inspiration act on it right then and there if I have a problem that I discovered one of my businesses that needs to be solved I won't sleep until at least the resolution is in motion and this is just a personal failing but if I'm on the board of a company I'll call the CEO if I'm running the company I'll call my reports if I'm responsible I'll get on there right then and there and solve it if I don't solve a problem the moment it happens or I don't start moving toward solving from when

2:16:25it happens I have no peace I have no rest I have no happiness until that problem is solved so solve it as quickly as possible I literally won't sleep until it's solve maybe that's a personal characteristic but it's worked out well in business we squander our time with a death of a thousand cuts so another tweet ahead was you should be too busy to do coffee while still keeping an uncluttered calendar people who know me know that I'm famous for simultaneously doing two things one is having a very clean calendar I have almost no meetings on it and there are people that I meet with when they see my calendar they almost weep well at the same time I am busy

2:16:59all the time I'm always doing something and it's usually quote unquote work-related but it is whatever the highest impact thing is that needs to be done at that time and that I'm most interested inspired about but the only way to do that is to constantly ruthlessly decline meetings people want to do coffee and build relationships and that's fine early in your career when you're still exploring but later in your career were exploiting and there are more things coming at you and you have time for you have to ruthlessly cut meetings out of your life if someone wants to do a meeting see if you can do it with a phone call instead if they want to do a phone call see

2:17:32if they can do it with an email instead if they want to do it email see if they can do it a text message instead if their text messaging you should probably be ignoring most text messages unless they're true emergencies so one has to be utterly ruthless about dodging meetings when you do do meetings do walking meetings do standing meetings keep them short keep them actionable keep them small any meeting with eight people and it's sitting on a conference table nothing is getting done in that you're literally just dying one hour at a time doing coffee reminds me of an old quote I think from Steve Jobs when they asked him hey why does an apple come to conventions or why

2:18:07don't you come to my convention and his response was well then because we wouldn't be here working yeah I used to have a tough time turning people down for meetings but now I just tell them outright I just say look I don't do non-transactional meetings I don't do meetings without a strict agenda I don't do meetings unless we absolutely have to maybe used to do this he would email people when they would ask maybe and I for a meeting like coffee meeting it to know you he would say we don't do meetings unless is life and death urgent and then that person has to respond yeah its life in that origin or there's no meeting when you have something important or

2:18:40something valuable other busy interesting people will meet with you your calling card has to be hey here's what I'm done here's what I can show you let's meet and I'll be respectful of your time if this is useful to you and I find that there are very busy important people who will take your meeting but you have to come with a proper calling card all the people who tweet and who email famous or rich people saying hey if I could just get one meeting with you and they're vague about it they're not gonna get anywhere in life you have to build up the credibility when for example an investor in the tech business in the venture business looks at a start-up

2:19:16the first thing they want to see is they want to see some evidence of product progress they don't just want to even see a slide back they want to see product progress because the product progress is the resume for the entrepreneur it is the unshakable unfaithful resume so you have to do the work to use a crypto analogy you have to have proof of work if you have proof of work and you truly have something then you shouldn't hesitate to put it together in an email and send it to somebody but even then when you're asking for a meeting you want to be super actionable about it but I would say even the other side even if you yourself haven't made

2:19:48it yet if you think you're gonna make it by going out and networking and doing a whole bunch of meetings you're probably incorrect yes the networking can be important early in your career and yes you can get serendipitous with meetings but the odds are pretty low and as we spent time talking about earlier when you are just meeting people and hoping to get that lucky break you're relying on type 1 luck which is blind luck and type 2 luck which is hustle luck but what you're not getting is type 3 or type 4 luck which are the better kinds where you spend time developing a reputation working on something developing a unique point of view and being able to spot opportunities

2:20:25that others can a busy and a busy mind will destroy your ability to do great things in this world if you want to be able to do great things whether you're a musician or whether you are a entrepreneur or whether you're an investor you need free time and you need a free mind we just finished talking about the importance of working hard and valuing your time next there's a few tweets on the topic of working for the long term the first tweet is become the best in the world of what you do keep redefining what you do until this is true if you really want to get paid in this world you want to be number one at whatever it is

2:21:05that you're doing and it can be niche that's the point it can literally be you're getting paid for just being you you know at this point some of the more successful people in the world are that way Oprah gets paid for being Oprah Joe Rogan gets paid for being Joe Rogan and they're being authentic to themselves so what this tweet is trying to say simultaneously is that you want to be number one but you want to keep changing what you do until you're number one you can't just pick something arbitrary you can't say I'm gonna be the fastest runner in the world and now you got to beat the same volt that's too hard of a problem but what you can

2:21:37do is you can keep changing what your objective is until it arrives to your specific knowledge your skill sets your position your capabilities your location your interests and then converges to making you number one so when you're searching for what to do you actually have two different foci that you have to keep in mind at all points and one of those is I want to be the best at what I do and the second is what I do is flexible so that I am the best at it until you arrive at a comfortable place we were like yes this is something I can be amazing at while still being authentic to who I am and this is not going to be

2:22:13an overnight discovery it's gonna be a long journey but at least you know how to think about it the most important thing for a company is to find product market fit I would say the most important thing for an entrepreneur is to find founder product market fit where you are naturally inclined to build the right product which has a market and that's a three focus problem which is you got to make all three of those work at once if you want to be successful in life you just have to get comfortable managing multivariate problems multiple objective functions that and this is one of those cases where you have to map at least two or three at once this reminds me of

2:22:46your tweet about escaping competition through authenticity it sounds like part of this is a search for who you are it's both a search and a recognition because sometimes when we search our egos we want to be something that we aren't and our friends and family are better at telling us actually who we are or looking back at what we've done is a better indicator of who we are Peter teal talks a lot about how competition is besides the point it's counterproductive we're highly mimetic creatures we copy what everybody else is doing around us we copy our desires from them everyone around me is a great artist I want to be an artist if everyone around me is a great business person

2:23:23I want to be a business person everybody around me as a social activists I want to be a social activist that's where my self-esteem will come from you have to be a little careful when you get caught up into these status games that you end up competing over things that aren't worth competing over so Peter Thiel talks about how he was gonna be a law clerk because he was in law school everybody around him wanted to be a law clerk for a Supreme Court justice or some famous judge and he got rejected and that's what made him go into business so it helped him break out of a lesser game into a greater game so sometimes you just get trapped in

2:23:56the wrong game because you're competing and the best way to escape competition to get away from the specter of competition which is not just stressful and nerve-racking but will often drive you to just the wrong answer the way to escape competition is to just be authentic to yourself if you are fundamentally building and marketing something that is just an extension of who you are no one can compete with you on that who's gonna compete with Joe Rogan or Scott Adams it's impossible it's somebody else gonna come along and write a better Dilbert no it's someone going to compete with Bill Watterson and create a better Calvin and Hobbes no there being authentic this is easiest to see in art artists are

2:24:32by definition all naturally authentic but even entrepreneurs are authentic who's gonna be Elon Musk who's gonna be Jack Dorsey these people are authentic and the businesses and products they create are authentic to their desires and their means if somebody else came along and started launching rockets I don't think would phase Elon one bit he's still gonna get to Mars because that's his you know insane as it seems the one he set for himself and he's gonna accomplish it so authenticity naturally gets you away from competition it doesn't mean that you necessarily want to be authentic to the point where there's no product market fit it may turn out you're the best juggler on the unicycle but maybe there just isn't that

2:25:10much of a market for that even with YouTube videos so you gotta adjust that somehow until you find product market fit but at least lean towards authenticity towards getting away from competition and competition automatically leads towards copycatting and often towards just playing completely the wrong game especially an entrepreneurship the masses are never right if you see a lot of people tweeting about what a great market to enter is or you see journalists talking about a company is terrible they don't know anything if the masses knew how to build great things and create great wealth we'd already be done we'd already be rich by now so in a sense when you see a lot of competition sometimes that indicates to you that

2:25:51the masses are already here so it's already competed over too much and there's nothing here or it's in the wrong trend to begin with on the other hand if it's completely empty if the whole market is empty and no one's there that can also be a warning indicator that you've gone too authentic and not enough on the product market fit part of founder product market fit so there's a balance you have to find it but generally most people will make the mistake of paying too much attention to the competition and being too much like the competition and not being authentic enough and the great founders tend to be authentic iconoclasts I hate to bring up the scott adams skill stack one

2:26:30more time but also bring it up do you think one way of getting to authenticity is not necessarily adding some random skills that you think might be important but just really finding five or six various skills that you already authentically do and just stacking them on top of each other and not even in any purposeful way if you are expressing who you are you're going to be expressing all these little five or six different skills anyway that's really where life is going to lead you anyway long term if you are good and successful at what you do you will find that whatever your hobbies were you're almost doing them for a as Robert Frost said you know combine your vocation and

2:27:12your avocation what you love to do and what you do do so I think you'll find yourself there anyway and you're right about the skill stack and that everyone's got multiple skills we aren't all one-dimensional creatures even though that's how we have to portray ourselves and our online profiles to get employed you meet somebody and they say I'm a banker or I'm a bartender or I'm a barber or what have you all the B's but people are multivariate they have a lot of skills one banker might be going to finance another one might be good at sales the third one might be just good at macroeconomic trends and have a feel for the markets another one might be really good at

2:27:43picking individual stocks you know another one might just be good at maintaining relationships rather than selling new relationships so everyone's gonna have their various niches and you're gonna have multiple niche it's not gonna be just one so over time you will find as you go through your career both you will gravitate towards the things that you're good at which by definition are almost the things you enjoyed doing otherwise you wouldn't be good at them you wouldn't have put in the time and other people will push you towards the things that you're good at because you're smart bosses and you're smart coworkers and you're smart investors will realize okay you're really world class and this thing we can recruit somebody else for

2:28:16that other thing so ideally you want to end up specializing in being you I think when you're being authentic you don't really mind competition that much yeah it pisses you off and it inspires some fear and jealousy and all the other emotions that come along with it but also you don't really mind because you're more oriented towards the goal and the mission and worst case you get some ideas from them and there's often ways to work with the competition in a positive way and it ends up increasing the size of the market for you yeah sometimes it depends on the nature of the business Silicon Valley tech industry businesses tend to be winner-take-all at least the good ones and so when

2:28:57you see competition it can make you fly into a rage because it really does endanger everything you've built whereas if I was opening a restaurant and a more interesting version the same restaurant opens up in a different town that's fantastic I'm just gonna lift from them what's working and drop what I can see that they have already figured out is not working so it does depend to some extent on the nature of the business that said even the businesses that seem like that they are often in direct and really aren't they can end up adjacent or slightly different you're one step away from a completely different business and sometimes you need to take that one step and you're not gonna be

2:29:32able to take it if you're busy fighting over a booby prize kind of you're playing a stupid game gonna win a stupid prize it's not obvious right now because you're blinded by competition but three years from now it'll be obvious to give a simple example when I was first starting companies one of my first ones was called opinions which was an online product review site for all the products out there that was independent of Amazon and that space eventually turned into TripAdvisor and Yelp which is where we should have gone we should have done more local reviews because there's more value to having a review of a scarce item like in your local restaurant there is of an item like a

2:30:07camera which was gonna have a thousand reviews on Amazon but before we could get there we got caught up in the whole comparison shopping game and so we ended up merging with deal time and we competed with my Simon and biz raid which became Shopzilla and PriceGrabber and next tag and a whole bunch of these price comparison engines and we're all caught and fierce competition with each other and that whole space went to zero because it turns out Amazon 1e tail completely so there was no need for price comparison everyone just went to Amazon but we got the booby prize because we were caught in a competition with a bunch of our peers when really we should have been looking at

2:30:40what the consumer really wanted and being authentic to ourselves which was reviews in that price comparison and gone more and more into more and more esoteric items that needed to be reviewed where customers had less and less data and wanted reviews more badly so if we'd stayed authentic to ourselves we would have done better we're still talking about working for the long-term the next tweet on that topic is apply specific knowledge with leverage and eventually you will get what you deserve I would also add to that apply judgment apply accountability and apply the skill of reading this one is just a glib way of saying that it takes time even once you have all of these pieces in place there is

2:31:22an indeterminate amount of time that you're gonna have to put in and if you're counting you will run out of patience before it actually arrives so you just have to make sure that you give these things a proper time life is long Charlie Munger had some line on this somebody asked him about me him money and he reinterpreted that and he said what the questioner is actually asking is how do I get rich like you but faster before I end up as an really old guy and everybody wants it immediately but the world is an efficient place immediate doesn't work you do have to put in the time you do if you put in the hours and so I think you

2:31:54just have to put yourself in the position with the specific knowledge with the accountability with the leverage with the authentic skillset that you have to be the best in the world at what you do and then you have to enjoy it and just keep doing it and keep doing it and keep doing it and don't keep track and don't keep count because if you do you will run out of time I can look back at my career and the people two decades ago that I had identified as brilliant and hard-working but hadn't thought much more about it they're all successful now almost without exception on a long enough time scale you do get paid but it can easily be 10 or

2:32:2820 years sometimes it's five and if it's five or three and a friend of yours got there it can drive you insane but those are exceptions and for every winner there's multiple failures one thing that's important in entrepreneurship is you just have to be right once you get many many shots on goal you can take a shot on goal every three to five years maybe every ten at the slowest or once every year at the fastest depending on how you're iterating with startups but you really only have to be right once my little equation is that your eventual outcome will be equal to something like the distinctiveness of your specific knowledge times how much leverage you can apply to that knowledge

2:33:07times how often your judgment is correct times how singularly accountable you are for the outcome times how much society values what you're doing and then you compound all of that with how long you can keep doing it and how long you can keep improving it through reading and learning that's actually a really good way to summarize it it's probably worth even trying to sketch that equation out that said people try to then apply mathematics it was really philosophy so I've seen this happen in the past where I say one thing and then I say another thing that seemed contradictory if you treat as a math equation but it's obviously in different context and then people will say well you say that

2:33:46desire is suffering that's the Buddhist saying and then you say that all greatness suffering so does that mean all greatness comes from desire and cycle this isn't math people he can't just start carrying variables around and forming absolute logical outputs you have to know when to apply things so I think that is very useful to understand but at the same time one can't get too analytical about it it's what a physicist would call false precision when you take two made-up estimates and you multiply them together and you get four degrees of precision those decimal points don't actually count you don't have that data you don't have that knowledge in a model the more estimated variables you have the greater the error

2:34:24in the model so just adding more and more complexity to your decision-making process actually gets you a worse answer you're better off just picking the single biggest thing or two for example what am I really good at according to observation and according to people that I trust that the market values like that alone those two variables alone are probably good enough because if you're good at it you'll keep it up and if you're good at it you develop the judgment and if you're good at it and you like to do it eventually people will give you the resources and you won't be afraid to take on accountability so all the other pieces will fall in place product market fit is inevitable

2:35:00if you're doing something you love to do and the market wants it regarding the guy that gets rich in five years one of the tweets that you had on the cutting room floor was avoid people who got rich quickly they're just giving you their winning lottery ticket numbers this is generally true of advice anyway which is it's back to Scott Adams systems not goals if you ask a specific person what worked for them very often it's just like they're reading out the exact set of things that work for them which may not be applicable for you they're just reading your winning lottery ticket numbers it's a little glib there is something to be learned from them but you can't just take

2:35:40their exact circumstance and map it onto yours the best founders I know they listen and read to everyone but then they ignore everybody and they make up their own mind they have their own internal model of how to apply things to their situation and they do not hesitate to discard information if you survey enough people all the advice will cancel a zero so you do have to have your own point of and when something is sent your way you have to very quickly decide is that true outside of the context of what that person applied it in is it true in my context and then do I want to apply it you have to reject most advice but you have to

2:36:19listen to and read enough of it to know what to reject and what to accept even in this podcast you should examine everything if something does not feel true to you put it down set it aside if too many things seem untrue delete this podcast I think the most dangerous part of taking advice is that the person that gave it to you is not going to be around to tell you when it doesn't apply any longer yet I view the purpose of advice as a little different than most people I just view it as helping me have anecdotes and Maxim's that I can then later recall when I have my own direct experience and say ah that's what that person meant

2:36:5890% of my tweets are actually just Maxim's that I carve for myself there are then little mental hooks to remind me when I'm in that situation again like oh I'm the one who tweeted if you can't see yourself working with someone for life then don't work with them for a day so as soon as I know that this person is not gonna be someone that I'm gonna be working with 10 years from now then I have to start extricated myself in that relationship or just not investing that much more effort into it so I use my tweets and other people's tweets as that help compress my own learnings and be able to recall them because you know the brain space is

2:37:32finite you finite neurons so you can almost think of these as pointers addresses mnemonics to help you remember deep-seated principles where you have the underlying experience to back it up if you don't have the underlying experience then it's just reads like a collection of quotes it's like it's cool it's inspirational for a moment maybe you make a nice poster out of it but then you forget it and move on so all of these are really just compact ways for you to recall your own knowledge the last tweet on the topic of working for the long term is that when you're finally wealthy you'll realize that it wasn't what you were seeking in the first place but that's for another day that's

2:38:10a multi-hour topic in of itself first was thought it was a really clever way to end the whole thing because it disarms a whole set of people who'd say well you know what some point I get enriched because are a lot of people who just like the status signal virtue signal against the idea of wealth creation or making money so it was just a good way to disarm all of them but it's also true in that the things that you really want in life yes money will solve all your money problems but it doesn't get you everywhere the first thing you'll realize when you've made a bunch of money is that you're still the same person if you're happy you're happy

2:38:43if you're unhappy if you're calm and fulfilled and peaceful you're still that same person I know lots of very rich people who are extremely out of shape I know lots of rich people who have really bad family lives I know lots of rich people who are internally a mess so I would lean on another tweet that I put out which is actually when I think back on it I think it's my favorite tweet of mine it's not initially the most insightful it's not nearly the most helpful it's not even the one I think about the most but I just when I look at it there's just such a certain truth in there that it just resonates and that is that a

2:39:17calm mind a fit body and a house full of love these things cannot be bought they must be earned even if you have all the money in the world you can't have those three things Jeff Bezos still has to work out he still has to work in his marriage or whatever his next relationship is and his internal mental state is still gonna be very much not controlled by external events it's gonna be based on how calm and peaceful he's inside so I think those three things your health your mental health and your close relationships are things that you have to cultivate and can probably bring you a lot more peace and happiness than any amount of money ever will so that's

2:39:52what I meant now how to get there is actually a tweet storm that I still need to put out I've been working on it I have probably a hundred tweets on it it's just very hard to say anything on the topic without getting attacked from fifty different directions especially these days on Twitter so I've been hesitant to do it because I want to target it for a very specific kind of person there's a bunch of people who don't believe that working on your internal state is useful they're too focused on the external and that's fine there's nothing wrong with that they should do that and that's who they how to get rich tweet storm is for there's a bunch of people

2:40:24who believe that the only thing worth working on is complete liberation like you become the Buddha and they'll attack anything in the middle as being useless that's fine too most people aren't there so what I want to do is to create a tweet storm that is just very practical advice for everyday people who want to have a calmer internal state just a set of understandings realizations have truths and truths that if you were to imbibe them properly and again these are just pointers to ideas that you already have and experiences that you already have that if you keep these top of mind slowly but steadily it will help you with certain realizations that will lead you to a kamar internal state

2:41:03that's I want to work on Fitness is another big one I'm just not the expert there there are plenty of good people on Twitter who are better at Fitness than me and I think loving household and relationships actually automatically falls out of the other things if you have a calm mind and if you've already made money you should have good relationship there's no reason why you shouldn't a lot of divorces actually happen over money unfortunately that's just the reality of it so having money removes that part of it a lot of external battles happen because your internal state is not good when you're naturally internally peaceful you're gonna pick less fights you're gonna be more loving without expecting anything in return

2:41:41and that will take care of things on the external relationship front so money solves your money problems money buys you freedom in the material world I think that was a tweet from your cutting room floor and money lets you not do the things that you don't want to do yeah to me the ultimate purpose of money is so that you do not have to be in a specific place at a specific time doing anything you don't want to do we skipped one tweet because I wanted to cover all of the tweets on the topic of the long term and the tweet that we skipped was there are no get-rich-quick schemes that's just someone else getting rich off you this goes back

2:42:20to the world being an efficient place if there's an easy way to get rich it's already been exploited and there are a lot of people who will sell you ideas and schemes on how to make money but they're just always selling you some 7995 course or some audio book or some seminar which is fine everyone needs to eat people need to make living they might actually have really good tips but if they're giving you actionable high-quality advice that acknowledges that it's a difficult journey and will take a lot of time then I think that's realistic but if they're selling you some get-rich-quick scheme whether it's crypto or whether it's an online business or seminar they're just making money off you that's

2:42:59their get-rich-quick scheme it's not gonna necessarily work for you one of the things about this whole tweet storm and podcast is that we don't have ads on here we don't charge for anything we don't sell anything not because I don't want to make more money it's always nice to make more money we're doing work here but because it would completely destroy the credibility of the enterprise if I'm saying hey I know how to get rich and I'm gonna sell that to you it ruins it when I was young and I was kind of studying up on the topic one of my favorite books on the topic was actually called how to get rich by Felix Dennis the founder of Maxim magazine

2:43:31billionaire who passed away and he had a lot of crazy stuff in there but he had some really good insights too but whenever I read something by him or by the GoDaddy founder Bob Parsons or say Andrew Carnegie now you read stuff by people who are already very wealthy and they've clearly made their wealth in other fields not by selling the how to get rich line they have a credibility you just trust them and they're not trying to make money off of you they are obviously trying to win some status and some ego right you always have to have a motivation for doing something but at least that is a cleaner reason why they're probably not lying they're probably not fooling

2:44:05you they're not slowing you at some level every founder has to lie to every employee of the company that they have where they have to convince them that it's better for you to work for me then is to do what I did and go work for yourself so I've always had a hard time with that which is why the only honest with in my companies I've recruited entrepreneurs and I tell them you're gonna get to be entrepreneurial in this company and the day you're ready to go start your own next thing I'm gonna support you I'm never gonna get in the way of you starting a company but this can be a good place for you to learn how to build

2:44:36a good team and build a good culture how to find product market fit to perfect your skills and meet some amazing people while you figure out exactly what is you gonna do because positioning timing deliberation are very important when starting a company but what I've never been able to do is look them in the face and say you must be at your desk by 8:00 a.m. because I'm not gonna be at my desk by 8:00 a.m. I want my freedom or say that you're great at being a director today and you'll be a VP tomorrow you know putting them into that career path track because I don't believe in it if anyone is giving advice on how to get rich and

2:45:09they're also making money off of it they should have made their money elsewhere like you don't learn how to be fit from a fat person you don't wanna learn how to be happy from a depressed person so you don't wanna learn how to be rich from poor person but you also don't want to learn how to be rich from somebody who makes their money by telling people how to be rich it's suspect anytime you see somebody who's actually gotten rich following some gurus advice on getting rich just remember that in any random process if you run it long enough and if enough people participate in it you will always get every single possible outcome with probability one there's a lot of

2:45:48random error in there and then also this is why you have to absolutely and completely ignore business journalists and economists academics when they talk about private companies I won't even name names but like when a famous economist rails on Bitcoin or when a business journalist attacks the latest company that's IP owing it's complete nonsense those people have never built anything they're professional critics they don't know anything about making money all they know is how to criticize and get page views and you are literally becoming Dumbo by reading them you are burning neurons I'll leave you with a quote from the same Talib that I liked where he said if you want to be a philosopher King first become a king and

2:46:23then become a philosopher not first become a philosopher and then become a king I'm glad you brought up Talib because I was gonna finish this by saying just remember the title of his first book which is fooled by randomness one of the reasons why we're a little vague in this podcast is because we're trying to lay down principles that are timeless as opposed to just giving you the winning lottery ticket numbers from yesterday you summarized this entire Tweed storm with two words productize yourself productize and yourself yourself has uniqueness productize has leverage yourself has accountability productize has specific knowledge yourself also has specific knowledge in there so all of these pieces you can combine them into these two words whenever you're

2:47:10doing anything in business if you're looking towards a long term getting wealthy you should ask yourself is this authentic to me is it myself that I'm projecting and then am i productizing it am i scaling it am i scaling with labour or with capital or with code or with media so it's a very handy simple mnemonic I mean what is this podcast this is a podcast called nevah land literally productizing myself with a podcast you want to figure out what you're uniquely good at or what you uniquely are and apply as much leverage as possible so making money isn't even something you do it's not a skill it's who you are stamped out a million times making money should be a

2:47:53function of your identity and what you like to do another tweet that I really liked was this was not mine somebody else put this up they said find three hobbies one that makes you money one that keeps you fit and one that makes you creative I would change that slightly so I would say one that makes you money one that makes you fit and one that makes you smarter so in my case my hobbies would be reading making money as I love working with startups either investing in them brainstorming them starting them I just love that ideation and initial creation phase around startups and then on the hobby that keeps you fit I don't really have one closest thing I have

2:48:26is yoga but that's where I fell apart and I think people who early in life discover something like surfing or swimming or tennis or some sport that they continue doing throughout most of their life are very lucky because they found a hobby that'll make them fit we've finished discussing the tweet storm and we're going to spend some time on Q&A and discussing some of the tweets on the cutting room floor that didn't make it into the tweet storm my first question is do you think there are some common failure modes or typical things that people do wrong when they're trying to apply this advice a lot of people don't understand what specific knowledge really is or how to quote unquote obtain

2:49:05it people don't understand what accountability really entails they think that accountability means being successfully accountable no it means that you have to stick your neck out and fail with your name out there publicly and be willing to let people hate on you one of the reasons I'm less active and Twitter lately is because every tweet summons an army of nit pickers and haters and it gets exhausted but on the other hand you have to learn how to ignore them otherwise you can survive on Twitter a lot of people try to reconcile it with like should I quit my nine-to-five job or not that can be a very hard decision I don't think you need to go that extreme you can start

2:49:39applying accountability and leverage and specific knowledge even within your existing career it doesn't have to necessarily be fork off and do something else completely a lot of people will use it as a way to agree and disagree with their existing biases they'll say oh yeah I agree with that part or that part you're completely wrong the most interesting part should be the ones that you disagree with because clearly that proven that I know a few things so if you disagree with it then maybe that is an area where you can improve your thinking I've definitely improved my thinking all the time but I will tell you that in this tweets term I put down the minimum viable principles I did not

2:50:16put down the whole universe of what I know about how to make money because 90% of it is suspect I put down the bedrock the stuff that I'm pretty solidly sure about and I have not yet seen a tweet that has successfully contradicted anything in this tweet storm that would cause me to say oh yeah I got that one wrong think another place where people get a little bit off is they look at this and they say well this only applies to tech entrepreneurs I disagree the example that I gave about real estate was a good one in that regard it's just the nature of leverage that technology drives leverage so I'm gonna push you in a tech direction to get

2:50:53the free leverage that is available in tech and obviously this message is being delivered through the internet so it's going to have a pro internet bias there are also people who believe that it is unfair to the people who don't have these opportunities to do anything with the opportunites that they do have well that defeatist attitude why even get out of bed in the morning ninety percent of people are dead there's a lot of people who are living on a dollar a day do you live on a dollar a day no it's up to you to play the hand that you're dealt to the best of your ability and then you can take the winnings the pot from that hand and

2:51:24do whatever you want with it to fix the world but saying that you should not do things just because others can't do things is living in denial it's an excuse to not do anything there are also people who believe that wealth creation is fundamentally at odds with an environmentally safe and healthy and they view the whole thing is a giant zero-sum game that's a false narrative as well Elon Musk is not playing a zero-sum game with the environment and there are plenty of entrepreneurs who are not if anything there is a word that environmentalists love which is sustainability and for-profit businesses are at least financially sustainable if nothing else you can do a B Corp which has a dual mission a

2:52:03lot of nonprofit efforts would actually be better served by for-profit companies because then they wouldn't have to go begging for grants all the time they would be financially sustainable some great founders realized their philanthropic visions by running a business who is this advice targeted to is it for my lyft driver is it for an internet entrepreneur is it for somebody who wants to start a YouTube channel because it comes from someone who's steeped in Silicon Valley and tech companies it's always gonna have a bias towards that but I think it's good for anybody who wants to be entrepreneurial anybody who wants to control their own life anybody who wants to deterministically and reliably improve their ability to create wealth over time

2:52:48is patient and looking at for the long haul it's certainly if you're 80 years old retired running out of energy you should probably just stay retired but there are 80 year olds who haven't a lot of energy and want to do new things and live for the future it can obviously apply very easily to a young person I would say 910 years old and up the most difficult one it's probably middle-aged because when we're in our 30s 40s 50s we already have a lot invested we have a lot of obligations because those the years where we're earning and people are relying upon us we don't want to change because we don't want to admit defeat in what we've been doing to

2:53:23date but that's where it can actually be the most fruitful it may be the most difficult pivot you have a 9 to 5 job leave a family relying upon you and so it may seem like the things in this podcast are far too idealistic but maybe it can inform your weekend projects maybe it can inform your self free education that you do at night on the internet maybe it can inform what roles you take on in the company that you're at because they move you closer and closer to points of leverage points of judgment or points where you're naturally good at and you're authentic it might cause you to take on more accountable I even applied Pease meals these principles can

2:53:58directionally guide you regardless of what stage you are at in life short of retirement and if you're in retirement just test them to see if they're true and then teach them to your kids or your grandkids there's many different ways to participate it should really apply to almost everybody who has complete body sound mind and is looking to work I think one way to apply the advice is to look at who is getting the leverage off of the work that you're doing look up the value chain look at who's above you and who is above them and see how they are taking advantage of the time and the work that you're doing and how they're applying leverage to it people do

2:54:36that naturally in that they want to move up the corporate ladder but that's mostly about managing other people and what you really want to be doing is managing more capital products media and community people think about moving up the ladder in their organization but they don't think that often about moving to a different organization or creating their own organization to get more leverage in general ceteris paribus fancy latin words for all other things equal you will do better in a smaller organization than a larger one you will have more accountability it'll be more visible you are more likely to be able to try on multiple things to find out the thing that you are uniquely good at people are more likely

2:55:18to give you leverage through battlefield promotions you're gonna have more flexibility there will be more authenticity to how the company operates a good progression for careers start out in a large company and then progressively move to smaller and smaller ones it's very hard to go from a small company to work in a larger company larger companies tend to be more about politics and less about merit they're more stable but they're less innovative situations the goal long term is if we are all wealthy is that we're all working for ourselves and the people who are working for us are essentially robots and today that's software robots in data centers executing code tomorrow it could be delivery BOTS flying BOTS mechanical bots that

2:55:57are carrying things around this goes back to this idea of the best relationships or peer relationships if there's someone above you then that's someone to learn from if you're not learning from them and improving then there shouldn't be anybody above you if there's somebody below you it's because you're teaching them and enabling them if you're not teaching them and enabling them then get a robot underneath you don't need a human being below you this is utopian and it's long ways off but in the not-too-distant future anybody who wants to work for themselves will be able to work with themselves you may have to make other sacrifices you may have to take on more risk you may take on more accountability you

2:56:34may have less steady income but more and more I think the younger generation is realizing that if they're gonna work for themselves in one of your tweets you listed out some of the things you should study like programming sales reading writing arithmetic one of the items that ended up on the cutting room floor was that you should also study ethics I was originally going to put that out there as a concession to people who believe that making money is evil and that the only way to make it is evil but then I realized Efex is not necessarily something you study it's something you think about and it's something you do every one of us has a personal moral code and where

2:57:15you got that moral code from is different for everybody it's not like I can point you to a textbook sure I could point to some Roman and Greek texts but that's not gonna suddenly make you ethical there's the golden rule right do unto others as you would have them do unto you or there's nothing Talib silver rule which is don't do unto others which you don't want them doing unto you once you've been in business long enough you will realize how much of business is about trust and it's about trust because you want a compound interest you want to be able to work for long periods of time with trustworthy people without having to reevaluate every discussion with that and we

2:57:48think each time and without having to constantly look over your shoulder and so over time you gravitate towards working with certain kinds of people and similarly those people will gravitate towards working with other ethical quote unquote people so being ethical turns out to be a selfish imperative you want to be ethical because it attracts the other long-term players in the network and then they want to do business with you and if you build a good enough reputation for being ethical eventually people will pay you just to do deals through you because you're the one who'll validate and ensure Neels by your presence because you wouldn't be involved with low-quality stuff so being ethical actually pays off in the long run but

2:58:29it's the very long run in the short run being unethical pays off which is why so many people go for it it's a greedy algorithm but you can be ethical simply because you're long-term greedy and I can even outline a framework for different parts of so-called ethics just based on the idea of long term selfishness for example you want to be honest because it leaves you with a clear mind you don't have two threads running in your head one is the lies that you told it to keep track of and the other one is what you're saying you just have to think about one thing at a time so you have more energy to think about that thing so your clear

2:59:01thinker also by being honest you're rejecting the people who only want to hear the pretty lies so you forced those people out of your network and sometimes it's painful like friends and family but long-term you create room for the people who like you exactly the way that you are so that is a selfish reason to be honest for example in negotiations if you're the kind of person who always tries to get the best deal for yourself you will win a lot of very early deals and it'll feel very good but on the other hand there are a few people who will recognize that you're always scrabbling and not acting fairly and they will tend to avoid you over time those people

2:59:39end up being the deal makers in the network because people go to them for a fair shake or to figure out what's fair and so if you are cutting people fair deals you don't get paid in the short term but in the long term everybody wants to deal with you and you end up being a market hub you have more information you have trust you have reputation and people end up doing deals through you a lot of wisdom is just realized in the long-term consequences of your actions and so the longer term you're willing to look the wiser that you're going to seem to everybody around you do you want to tell us about some of the jobs that you had

3:00:11as a youth and the specific job that kicked off your fanatical obsession with creating wealth this gets a little personal and I don't want to do the humble brag thing there was some thread going around Twitter about like name five jobs you've held and every rich person on there was trying to signal how they were held like normal jobs so I don't want to play that game I've held a bunch of menial jobs there people have worse than me people who had it better than me there was one point where I was washing dishes in the school cafeteria and I said F this I hate this I can't do this anymore and I sweet-talk my way to a computer science prof

3:00:47of helping ta his CS class in algorithms when I myself was completely unqualified for that and so it forced me to learn computer science algorithm so I could ta the rest of the course but that desire came out of the suffering of Washington dishes in the college cafeteria which is not to say there's anything wrong with that there's nothing wrong with anything really but it was just not for me I did not enjoy it I had an active mind and I wanted to make my money and earn my living through mental activities not through physical activities but sometimes it takes the suffering of doing the wrong thing to motivate you enough to do the right thing I worked at a law

3:01:23firm for a while a big prestigious law firm in New York City I had a big internship there and I basically got fired for surfing using that back in the day this is before the internet was a big thing using that was the newsgroups and it was the only way for me to stay from being completely bored and I was an overpaid guy wearing a tie in a suit and had to hang out in the conference room when the lawyers needed photocopies I would make photocopies and the meantime I would be bored out of my skull this is pre iPhone thank God to Steve Jobs for saving us all from unending boredom but I used to read the Wall Street Journal

3:01:53or anything that I could get my hands on I would have read the back of a brochure just to keep from going insane because listening to a bunch of corporate lawyers discuss how to optimize my new details in a big contract is really dull and they got mad at me because they wanted me to sit there quietly and not read The Wall Street Journal they said that's rude that's misbehavior so I got called up and reprimanded a bunch of times and then I was finally terminated and I was sent home in shame early from my very prestigious internship destroying my chance of going to law school that I was unhappy for all of an hour but ultimately it's one of the

3:02:27best things that ever happened to me because then I would have ended up as a lawyer not that I have anything against lawyers but it's not what I was meant to do you mentioned the catering job that you had a while back that really kicked off the whole obsession that was an Envy thing when I was in high school I had to make some money to pay for my first semester at college and I had to get a job it was a summer of 19 90 1991 timeframe so this was the bush senior recession if anyone who's alive back then remembers it was actually really hard to get a job so I ended up working for an Indian food catering company and I ended up having to serve at a birthday party for a kid who it was actually in my school so I saw my classmates and I was out there serving food and drinks to them and that was incredibly embarrassing

3:03:13I wanted to hide away and die right there but you know what it's all part of the plan it's all part of the motivation if I hadn't had that happened I probably wouldn't be as motivated and I wouldn't be as successful so it's all fine but it was definitely a very strong motivator in that sense envy can be useful and we can also eat you alive if you let it follow you your entire life but there are points in your life where it can be a very powerful booster rocket we spoke earlier about picking a business model that has leverage from scale economies Network effects zero marginal cost of replication there were a few other ideas on the cutting room floor

3:03:49that I want to go through with you the first one was the principal-agent problem so mental models are all the rage everyone's trying to become smarter by adopting mental models I think mental models are interesting but I don't think explicitly in terms of a mental model checklists I know Charlie Munger does but that's just not how I think instead I tend to focus on the few lessons that I've learned in life over and over that I think are incredibly important and seem to apply almost universally one that keeps coming up from microeconomics because as we've established macroeconomics is not really worth spending time on is what's called the principal agent problem principal in this case is principal with the P al

3:04:28not ple so it's not a principle that you follow it's a principle who is a person a principal is an owner and an agent is the person who works for the owner so you can think of it as an employee the difference being a founder an employee I can summarize this by a famous quote that either was said by Napoleon or by Julius Caesar it's generally attributed to either one but he said if you want it done then go if not then send which is saying if you want to do something right do it yourself because other people just don't care enough now the principal-agent problem sub everywhere in microeconomics the way that they try to characterize it is that the

3:05:08principles incentives are different than the agents incentives so the owner of the business wants what is best for the business and will make the most money the agent generally wants whatever will look good to the principal or might make them the most friends in the neighborhood or in the business or might make them personally the most money you see this a lot with hired gun CEOs running public companies where the ownership of the public company is distributed so widely that there's no principle remaining so nobody owns more than 1% of the company the CEO takes charge stuffs the board with their buddies and then starts issuing themselves low price stock options or doing a lot of stock buybacks because their compensation

3:05:47is based directly tied to the stock price so agents have a way of hacking systems this is what make incentive design so difficult as Charlie Munger says if you can be working on incentives don't work on anything else almost all human behavior can be explained by incentives the study of signaling and signals is seeing what people do despite what they say people are much more honest with their actions and they are with their words you have to get the incentives right to get people to behave correctly it's a very difficult problem because the good people aren't purely coin-operated they're not just looking for money they're also looking for other things like status or meaning in what they do principal-agent problem is

3:06:27the one that as a business owner you're always going to be trying to figure out how do I make this person think like me how do i incent them how do I give them founder mentality and I think you have to truly have been a founder to fully appreciate how important this founder mentality thing is and what a difficult and gnarly problem the principal-agent problem is what I would say to you is if you are a principal you essentially want to spend a lot of your time thinking about this problem what that means is you want to take your top lieutenants and you want to be very generous with them in terms of ownership and incentives even if they don't necessarily

3:07:03realize it because over time they will and you want them to be aligned with you in how they operate when you do business deals it's better to have an aligned partnership where you both have the same as then a partnership where you got the advantage in the deal you negotiate in such a way that you've got the better end of the transaction because eventually the other person will figure it out or they'll be misaligned and the partnership will fall apart either way it's not going to be one of those things that you can invest into with the benefits of compound interest over decades finally if you're in a current role where you're an agent you're an employee your most important job

3:07:40is to think like a principal the more you can think like a principal the better off you're going to be long term because it's training you how to be a principal long-term and eventually you will become a principal it's also going to align you with the principal and a good principal will then promote you or empower you or give you accountability or leverage way out of proportion to what might be your menial role I'm always very impressed by founders who will promote up very very young people through the ranks having them skip multiple levels despite their experience and invariably it happens because this agent who's way deep down things like a principal so if you can hack your way through the

3:08:21principal agent problem you probably solved half of what it takes to run a company the reason I asked about this one first is because I feel like I personally never see the principal agent problem in my work I tend to work in small teams where everybody is highly economically aligned and the people have been filtered for a commitment to the mission and everybody else who doesn't work out moves on to another role elsewhere these are all heuristics that you have designed to avoid having to deal with the single biggest problem in management another example of a heuristic you can have that helps you route around the principal agent problem is they deal with the smallest firms possible so for example when

3:09:08I'm hiring a lawyer or a banker or even accountant to work on my deals one of the things that have become very cognizant about is the bigger firms all other things equal are generally worse yes they have more experience yes they have more people yes they have a bigger brand but what you'll find is that the principal and the age our highly separated and very often the principal will sell you and convince you to work with a firm but then all the work will be done by an agent who simply doesn't care as much and you can end up getting substandard service so I prefer to work with boutiques and my ideal law firm to work with is a law firm

3:09:47of one my ideal banker to work with is a solo banker now you're making other sacrifices and trade-offs in terms of that person's resources and you are betting big in that person but you've got one throat to choke there's no one else to point fingers to there's nowhere to run the accountability is extremely high if you're an agent the best way to operate is just say what wouldn't the founder do if you think like the owner and you act like the order it's only a matter of time until you become the owner let's chat about the Kelly criterion the Kelly criterion is a very popular as mathematical formulation of a simple concept and a simple concept is don't risk everything stay

3:10:32out of jail don't bet everything on one big gamble just be very careful how much you bet each time so you don't lose the whole kitty the Kelly criterion mathematically formulates if you're a gambler even when you have an edge how much should you gamble per hand because even when you have an edge you can still lose so let's say you're a 51/49 edge every gambler knows not to bet the whole kitty on that 5149 edge because you could just lose everything and you don't get to come back to the average Nassim Taleb famously talks about organdy City which is a fancy word for the simple concept that what is true for a hundred people on average isn't the same as

3:11:09one person averaging that same thing a hundred times the easiest way to see that is by playing Russian roulette six people who play Russian roulette once each and then each winner gets a billion dollars one person ends up dead five people have a billion dollars versus one person who plays Russian roulette with the same one gun six times is never gonna end up a billion or is gonna end up worth zero and so risk taking especially when the averages are calculated across large populations is not always rational the Kelly criterion helps you avoid ruin the number one way in which people get ruined and modern business is not by betting too much but it's by cutting corners and doing unethical things

3:11:50or downright illegal things ending up in an orange jumpsuit in prison or having a reputation ruined is the same as getting wiped to zero so never do those things let's talk about the shelling point is a game theory concept made famous by Thomas Schelling in the book called strategy of conflict which I do recommend reading it's about multiplayer games where other people are responding based on what they think your response is what he came up with was the mathematical formalization of how do you get people who cannot communicate with each other to coordinate suppose that I want to meet with you but I don't tell you where and I don't tell you when we both want to meet but we cannot

3:12:30communicate anymore information to each other that would sound like an impossible problem to solve we're done we can't do it not quite because I know that you're a rational person and smart and educated and you know I'm a rational person who's smart we're gonna start thinking if we have to pick an arbitrary date we're probably gonna pick new years and what time midnight or 12:01 a.m. and where would we meet what is a big meeting point well if we're Americans is probably in New York City it's the most important city then we're in New York City will be meet at midnight probably Grand Central Station under the clock maybe you end up at the Empire State Building but not likely you

3:13:06can just use social norms to converge onto a shelling point there are many times in many games where you can look at the game itself whether it's business or art or politics and you can find the converging shelling point within the context of that game you can cooperate with the other person here's a simple example let's suppose that you have two companies that are competing heavily with each other and they hold an oligopoly let's say that they're competing right now and the price fluctuates between 8 bucks and 12 bucks for whatever the service is don't be surprised if they both converge on 10 bucks without ever talking to each other do you want to talk about Pereiro optimal Pareto optimal is

3:13:44another concept from game theory along with Pareto superior means that something is better in some ways while being equal or better in the other ways it's not worse off in anyway this is an important concept when you're negotiating with somebody if you can make a solution Pareto superior to where it was before you will always do that Pareto optimal is when the solution is the best that it can possibly be then you can't change it without making it worse in at least one dimension there is a hard trade-off from this point forward these are important concepts to understand when you're involved in a big negotiation in negotiation though I would generally say that this is a tweet that I have negotiations

3:14:26are won by whoever cares less negotiation at the end of the day is about not wanting it too badly if you want something too badly then the other person will be able to extract more price from it if you do care more about something than the other person and they are taking advantage of you in a negotiation then your best way to deal with that is to turn it from a short-term game into a long-term game try to make it into a repeat game try to bring reputation into line try to bring other people in who may have a say in the future or may want to play games of this person in the future an example of a very high cost low information single move game is having your house renovated contractors are notorious for over booking ripping people off being unaccountable I'm sure contractors have their own side of it the homeowner has unreasonable demands we found problems the homeowner doesn't

3:15:18want to pay for it they don't understand there are low information buyers it's a very expensive transaction historically it's been very hard to find good contractors and the contractor is no choice on what a good homeowner is you try to go through friends you try to go through reputation and what you're basically doing there is you're trying to convert a single move expensive game with a high probability of cheating on both sides into a multi move game one way to do that say well actually I need two different projects done so the first project we'll do together and then based on that I'll decide if we do the second project you can split your work up into two projects another way

3:15:54might be I'm gonna do this project with you and then I have three friends who want projects done and they're waiting to see the outcome of these projects another one might be the same person operating within the same community and having a reputation in the community to protect another one could be you write them a yelp or a thumbtack review these are all ways of turning a single move game into a longer-term game and helping get past a position of poor negotiating leverage and poor information we talked about compounding and compounding interest but we didn't really dig into it that much relationships are a good example of compound interest once you've been in a good relationship with somebody for a while

3:16:32whether it's business or its romantic life gets a lot easier because you know that person's got your back you don't have to keep questioning if I'm doing a deal with someone that I've dealt with for 20 years and I trust them and they trust me we don't have to read the legal contracts maybe don't even need to create legal contracts maybe we can actually do it on handshakes that kind of trust makes it very very easy to do business if nivi and I start another company I know that if things aren't working out we're both gonna be extremely reasonable about how to go about it how to exit out of it how to shut it down or even if we're scaling

3:17:06and how to bring in new people at this point we have mutual trust and that allows us to start businesses more easily and almost compounds the effect especially when you're dealing with something like a startup which is so difficult to pull off removing these frictional mechanisms can actually often be the difference between success and failure I think the number one most under-recognized reason startups fail is because the founders fall apart there's a couple non-intuitive things about compounding the first one is that most of the benefits of compounding comes at the end of the compounding so you may not necessarily see the huge benefits of it upfront there was a good quote from an article that Sam Altman wrote where he said

3:17:50I always want it to be a project that if successful will make the rest of my career look like a footnote again that just goes back to the idea that most of the benefits of compounding come at the end the other thing that's a little non-intuitive about compounding is that I think it's better to have a few deep compounding relationships with people instead of a large amount of non compounding relationships one of the under realized things in business is that it takes just as much effort to create a small business as it does to create a large business whether you're Elon Musk or whether you're the guy running three Italian restaurants in town you're working 80 hours a week you're sweating

3:18:30bullets you're hiring and firing people you're trying to balance the books it's highly stressful and it takes years and years of your life but in one case you get companies that are worth 50 hundred billion dollars and the adulation of everybody and the other hand you might make a little bit of money and you've got some nice restaurants so think big are there any other micro economic concepts outside of zero marginal cost of replication and scale economies that are important for people to understand price discrimination is an important thing to understand that what it means is that you can charge people different things based on their propensity to pay now you're not allowed different people different things just because you don't

3:19:12like them you have to offer them a little something extra but it has to be something that rich people care about business class seats will routinely cost five or ten times what an economy class seat does but it probably cost the airline just two maybe three acts to provide that it's just the rich person is more willing to pay so you have to give them the little things that they need extra to either signal they're rich or that little bit of comfort that they want price discrimination gets used a lot in enterprise software where you have a freemium product the free version will do almost everything but then if you want the version that's a little extra secure or hosted on

3:19:46your site or has multi-user administrations so the IT person can monitor everything that's going on you're suddenly find yourself paying 10 100 or infinite times as much as you go from a free product to a price product another good concept is consumer surplus and producer surplus which is the excess value that somebody gets even though they were willing to pay more the product was priced the same for everybody I get a lot of joy out of my morning coffee obviously I've made some money if my coffee cost $20 I would pay $20 my morning coffee but Starbucks doesn't know that it can't price the coffee $20 just for me because selling the exact same product so I'm getting a lot of

3:20:25consumer surplus out of the coffee and all businesses generate consumer surplus it's a good thing to keep in mind when someone's harping about how evil companies are Amazon might be a trillion dollar company but I will bet you they're generating trillions of dollars in consumer surplus through convenience and willingness to pay there are a lot of people who are willing to pay more than what Amazon charges them for all their services let's talk about NPV NPV is just the net present value of something it's when you say that stream of payments I'm gonna get in the future what is that worth today so a common example of this is you're joining a startup company and you're getting stock options and the

3:21:04founder says well this company is going to be worth a billion dollars and I'm giving you Oh point one percent of the company therefore you're getting a million dollars with the stock what he's or she's arguing is what's gonna be worth in the future you have to discount that back to today you have to figure out what is that worth today and you have to apply a discount rate or an interest rate that takes into account the massive risk the startups face what you end up with is the price that it's worth today and that's the price at which a venture capitalist would invest in the company today so if that founder just raised around at ten million dollars and that

3:21:36company's only worth 1% of what the founders arguing your million-dollar package is actually worth $10,000 so NPV calculations at a very rough level you should be very comfortable doing in your head what's a mispriced externality you mentioned that at some point during our podcast and externalities when there is an additional cost that is imposed by whatever product is being produced or consumed that is not accounted for in the price of the product sometimes you can fix that by putting the price back into the product one of the most ardent ways people attack capitalism these days is that it's destroying the environment and if you throw away capitalism because destroying the environment then guess what we're all headed back to pre-industrial times

3:22:20there's not going to be a good thing so rather there is an externality because the environment is finite the environment is precious and we have to price it properly and fold it back in if people are wasting water or putting hydrocarbons in the atmosphere or polluting things you want to charge them what it costs to clean up that pollution return it to a pristine State perhaps that price has to be very very high if you raise that price high enough you knock out pollution it's much better than feel-good measures where we're just gonna ban plastic bags and we're gonna say don't take showers and Saturdays and Sundays when we're having a drought California likes to run declarations and ads to scare

3:22:58you into not taking showers and times when there's a drought when it would be just much better to raise the price of fresh water your average consumer might pay a few pennies more for a shower but then the almond farmers who consume a lot of the water will cut back on using fresh water and almond farming may move to a part of the country where water is more abundant properly pricing externalities can save resources in a tremendous way it's a good framework to think about how to be effective when you want to do things like save the environment rather than feel-good things it won't actually amount to anything one of the most common questions we get from people is how do

3:23:35I get the time to start investing in myself I have a job they'll take off the answer with one of the tweets from the cutting room floor where you said you will need to rent your time to get started this is only acceptable when you are learning and saving preferably in a business for society does not yet know how to train people and apprenticeship is the only model you're gonna have to work starting out unless you happen to be born rich in which case you probably won't have the motivation to make money in the first place if you're gonna do the work and join a business where apprenticeship matters you know Warren Buffett went and tried to work for Benjamin Graham's

3:24:10River School to learn how to be a value investor and you offered to work for free and Ben Graham said you're overpriced it's true in that these apprenticeship businesses you're probably making a sacrifice in terms of short term career work there but try to learn something where people haven't quite figured out how to teach it yet and that can happen if you're working in a field that is brand new and quickly expanding so no one has figured it out or it's a fuel that's very circumstantial where the details really matter and it's always moving for example fund investments or investing in general is one of those skills entrepreneurship is one of those skills one of the most coveted jobs that's come

3:24:51up in Silicon Valley in the last half decade or so is being a chief of staff or an entrepreneur where the brightest young kids will follow the CEO or the entrepreneur around and do whatever that person needs them to do and many cases there overqualified for the position you may have someone who has two graduate degrees who is essentially running the CEOs laundry for that day because that's the most important thing that needs to be done but at the same time they're also gonna be sitting in all the highest end staff meetings they're gonna be privy to all the venture fundraising decks and all the stress and drama theatrics innovation and knowledge that can only come from being Mexican entrepreneur because

3:25:27the entrepreneur is willing to do anything and everything to make their company successful and the chief of staff was accompanying them and learning now obviously this is very Silicon Valley centric tech company advice if you are currently stuck in a normal job and you don't have the opportunity to learn in an apprenticeship model and you need to make money then go ahead and do that job but even within the context of that job try to be innovative sign up to take on new challenges new responsibilities find the part of the job that has a steepest learning curve what you're really trying to avoid is repetitive drudgery doesn't serve anybody then you're essentially just counting the time until your job is automated

3:26:06it away even if you're a barista at the coffee shop try to figure out how to make connections with the customers try to figure out how to innovate on what you're offering them on your basic service and delight the customer and what will happen is managers founders owners they notice the hardest thing for any founder is to find people who will work with them who have founder mentality this is a fancy way of saying they care enough and what most people will say well I'm not the founder I'm not being paid enough to care actually you are the knowledge and the skills that you gain by having founder mentality set you up to be a founder down the line and it

3:26:46pays you in that sense you can get a lot out of almost any position you just have to put a lot into it if I'm working a job and I want to figure out if I should get accountability judgments specific knowledge leverage it sounds like you're saying the one thing to optimize for is specific knowledge out of all those things if you can judgment takes experience takes a lot of time to build up you have to put yourself in positions where you can exercise judgment that will come from taking on accountability leverage is something that society gives you much later once you've demonstrated your judgment unless you learn a code or you become good with media these are permissionless leverage kind

3:27:29of comes later judgment comes later accountability you can take on immediately you can say hey I'll take charge of this thing that nobody wants to take charge Oh so accountability is where you can step up but then you're publicly putting your neck on the chopping block so you have to deliver specific knowledge gets built up by taking on accountability for things that other people don't know how to do and that perhaps you enjoy doing or you're naturally inclined towards doing you can be working in a factory and it may turn out that the hardest thing in the factory is knowing how to raise capital to keep the factory running and that's what the owner of the factory is always stressed out

3:28:05about and if you notice this and you're like I'm good at balancing my checkbook and a good head for numbers and I'm good at watching money but I haven't really raised money before you offer your help and become the owner sidekick in that regard you help solve their biggest problem you'll become the heir apparent early on find things where you have any interest and take on accountability don't worry about short-term compensation if you dive into the edge of knowledge which nobody knows how to solve and you solve the hard problems taking accountability people will line up behind you the leverage will come there were a couple other related tweets to this topic from the cutting room floor that I'll read up

3:28:45first the technology industry is a great place to acquire specific knowledge the frontier is always moving forward if you were genuinely intellectually curious you will acquire the knowledge ahead of others breo technologies around us everywhere the spoon was technology once fireless technology once but once we've figured out how to make it work it disappeared in the background became part of our everyday lives so technology is by definition the intellectual frontier it's taking the things that are recent from science or from culture that we have not yet figured out how to mass-produce and it's pretty to know how to commercialize it how to make it available to everybody so technology will always be where you can pick up specific knowledge that is

3:29:28valuable society that doesn't quite understand for example if I become a world-class expert in machine learning just when machine learning is starting to take off and I got there through my genuine intellectual interest and I bet my career on it I'm gonna do really well but 20 years from now machine learning may be second hat there are also timeless forms of specific knowledge for example if you're good at persuading people it's probably a skill that you picked up early on in life it's always going to apply because persuading people is always going to be valuable this is one of those skills that's generic it probably alone is not enough to build a career on it needs to be combined a skill

3:30:06stack you might combine persuasion with accounting combined with understanding for example semiconductor production lines and now all of a sudden you're the best semiconductor sales person that becomes the best semiconductor company CEO there are timeless specific knowledge skills those are skills I would say that can pretty much never be taught and then there are timely specific knowledge skills which come and go but even those tend to have fairly long shelf lives of decade or two decades or three decades so technology is a good place to find those specific skillsets and if you can bring in a more generic specialized knowledge skill sets the other tweet from the cutting room floor was related to accountability in companies it said companies don't know

3:30:50how to measure output so they measure inputs instead work in a way that your outputs are visible and measurable if you don't have accountability do something different the entire structure of rewarding people comes from the agricultural and industrial age where your inputs and your outputs matched up very closely the amount of hours that you put into doing something was a good rough proxy for what kind of output you're going to get today it's extremely nonlinear one good investment decision can make a company 10 or 100 million dollars one good product feature can be difference between product market fit and complete failure so judgment and accountability matter much much more and you want the accountability because sometimes the best engineers or the

3:31:38best salespeople are the ones who don't work very hard but then they'll ship that one critical product at just the right time or they'll make that one huge sale or that one huge deal that will make the company or at least make the numbers for the quarter it's very important that people are able to tell that you had a role in that that doesn't mean that you stomp all over your team humans are extremely sensitive to people who take too much credit so you do want to be the kind of person that is always giving out credit but the smart people will know who was responsible there are jobs where you're not customer-facing enough where you're kind of a cog in

3:32:12a machine and you sacrifice accountability to some degree an example is when you're a consultant as a consultant often you're giving the best ideas and the best outcome but it's being delivered through some person who's working within the organization at that point you may not have visibility to the top people in the organizations and you may be hidden behind a screen and that's just a trade-off that you're making in exchange for your independence and the consultant because you're not willing to play the corporate rat race or the corporate ladder game realize that with accountability you can get a lot more credit when things go right of course the downside is you get hurt a lot more when things go wrong you

3:32:50stick your neck out you have to be willing to be blamed sacrifice and even attacked so if you're the kind of person that thrives in a high accountability environment you're naturally also going to end up very thick-skinned over time you're gonna get hurt a lot people gonna attack you if you fail if you're working a job I think you can apply a lot of the principles of the tweet storm inside the job like we just discussed including other ones like partnering with rational optimists you can find people in the organization who are optimistic and rational that have energy integrity and intelligence and the flip side of this is that if you once you get some specific knowledge one way to scale

3:33:31it is to start training apprentices that you can then outsource some of your tasks to for example I made a bunch of good investments and I figured out a little bit here and there about the venture business and I could keep doing that I could keep just investing as an investor but instead I co-founded this project called spearhead where we train up-and-coming young founders to also become angel and investors and we give them a checkbook an apprenticeship model they come to us with specific deals of the looking at and we help them think through every unique situation and we basically apprentice them under us to learn the venture business and it's much more scalable we have classes and talks where we

3:34:12have tell them what we know and then there are office hours when they actually bring in the deals and they talk to us about specific deals and it turns out the classes and talks are largely worthless you can give all the generic advice you need to give in about an hour and then after that all the additional advice is sore circumstantial that essentially cancels to zero if you try to give it in some top-down fashion but the office hours are incredibly useful it just reinforces that this is one of those skills that can only be learned on the job and when you find a skill that can only be learned on the job by doing it that is a good indicator

3:34:45that you're dealing with specific knowledge another good indicator with you're doing specific knowledge is when you ask the person doing it what do you do every day and they can't give you a straight answer or get something on lines of what everyday is different based on what's going on that's a good indicator you're learning specific knowledge the thing is so complicated and it's so dependent upon circumstances that it can't be boiled down into a textbook form or communicated by a makemoney consultant the Mafia figured out this apprenticeship model a long time ago the best way to end up running one of the families was to become the driver for the dawn of one of the families there's a complicated business Tony

3:35:26Soprano said I'm a businessman who has to enforce my own contracts very complicated business

00:00嗨,我是 Nivi,你在听 Naval 播客。这是一集超长合并特辑,把我们做过的所有关于如何致富的节目都收进来了,内容全部基于他那条“如何不靠运气致富”的推文串。我把它们都收集在这里,因为下一集我们要换到新话题——幸福。我们之前发过一集这样的合并特辑,但这一集更大,大概三个半小时。它涵盖了“如何致富”推文串里的每一条推文,加上之后我们做的全部问答,还有最后十分钟我们从未发布过的额外内容。这一集整体的音质

00:42在第一个小时之后会好很多。节目笔记里有干净文稿的链接,或者你上网站 naval 看,网址在结尾。希望你们喜欢。你们大概是通过他的推特认识 Naval 的,今天我们要聊的是他那条史诗级推文串——如何不靠运气致富。我们会详细过一遍其中大部分推文,给 Naval 机会去展开它们,也就这个话题随便聊。他大概还会抛一些以前没发表过的想法。他也是 AngelList 等公司的联合创始人,是位高产的科技投资人,投过 Twitter、Uber 等等

01:23很多公司。我是 Naval 的联合创始人兼布道者,早年还和他一起写过 Venture Hacks 博客。是啊,我。那条“如何致富”推文串确实戳中了神经,很多人说它很有帮助,它跨越了圈层,也打动了科技行业之外的人,各行各业的人。人们确实想知道怎么解决自己的钱的问题,每个人也隐约知道自己想变富,但他们没有一套好的原则。财富、金钱和地位的区别是什么?财富是你真正想要的东西。财富是能在你睡觉时赚钱的资产。财富是那间有机器人不停产出东西的工厂,

02:03财富是夜里还在运行、服务其他客户的计算机程序,财富甚至是银行里被再投资到其他资产和其他生意里的钱。连一套房子都可以是一种财富,因为你可以把它租出去,虽然这大概是对土地生产力较低的一种用法,不如真正做点商业经营。所以我对财富的定义,更多是能在你睡觉时赚钱的生意和资产。但说到底,你真正想要财富,是因为它能给你买来自由,让你不必像戴项圈一样被拴住,不必早上七点起床赶着上班、坐在车里堵在路上,这样

02:39你就不必把整个生命都耗在消磨最有生产力的时间上,耗在一份无法满足你、没有灵魂的工作里。所以财富的目的是自由,仅此而已。不是为了买皮草大衣、开法拉利、驾游艇、坐湾流私人飞机满世界飞——那些东西很快就会变得极其无聊和愚蠢。财富真正的意义是让你成为自己的主权个体。但除非你真心想要它,否则得不到;而全世界都想要它,全世界都在为此拼命,某种程度上它是竞争性的。它是正和游戏,但确实有竞争成分,因为社会当下的资源是有限的,

03:14而为了拿到资源去做你想做的事,你必须脱颖而出。金钱是我们转移财富的方式。金钱是社会信用,是你在别人的时间上拥有借贷记账的能力。如果我做好我的工作,如果我为社会创造了价值,社会就说:哦谢谢,我们欠你些什么,因为你过去做了这些事。这是一张小欠条,我们就叫它钱。而钱会贬值,因为有人偷欠条,政府多印欠条,还有人伪造欠条。但钱真正想充当的,是一张可靠的欠条,来自

03:53社会,意思是:你,或者把钱给你的那个人,过去做了些什么,所以社会欠你些什么,而这些欠条可以转让。所以金钱就是我们转移财富的方式。人这一生从根本上玩的是两场大游戏,一场是金钱游戏,因为钱不能解决你所有的问题,但它能解决你所有关于钱的问题。我想人们知道这一点、也明白这一点,所以想赚钱。但与此同时,他们中的很多人内心深处相信自己做不到,他们不希望任何财富创造发生,于是他们用道德姿态攻击整个事业,说“赚钱是邪恶的”、

04:28“别做”之类的。但他们真正在做的是在玩另一场游戏——地位游戏。他们想在其他旁观者眼中显得地位很高,说“哦我不需要钱,我们不想要钱”。而地位就是你在社会等级里的排名。财富不是零和游戏。世界上每个人都可以有房子,因为你有房子并不剥夺我拥有房子的能力。恰恰相反,建的房子越多,建房子就越容易,我们对建房了解得越多,能拥有房子的人就越多。所以财富是一场非常正和的游戏,我们一起创造东西,

05:00我们启动这件事,想做出这件——希望是——艺术品,解释我们在做什么,到最后会有全新的东西被创造出来,这是正和游戏。而地位是零和游戏,它是非常古老的游戏,从猴子部落时代我们就在玩了,它是等级制的:谁第一、谁第二、谁第三。而第三要变成第二,第二就必须让出那个位置。所以地位是零和游戏。政治是地位游戏的一个例子,连体育都是:要有人赢,就必须有人输。我并不从根本上喜欢地位游戏——它们在社会中扮演重要角色,让

05:36我们搞清楚谁说了算——但你玩它们,是因为它们是必要的恶。问题在于它有进化上的根源:回到几千年前,地位比财富更能预测生存。因为当时在农业时代之前你不可能拥有财富,因为东西没法储存。狩猎采集者把所有东西背在身上,所以狩猎采集者完全生活在以地位为基础的社会里。农民开始走向以财富为基础的社会,而现代工业经济是更以财富为基础的社会。但地位与财富之间始终存在微妙的竞争。比如记者攻击富人、攻击科技行业时,他们其实是在争夺地位,他们在说:不,人民更重要,

06:18而我这个记者代表人民,所以我更重要。问题是,要玩这些地位游戏、要在地位游戏中获胜,你就必须踩低别人。这就是你应该在生活中避开地位游戏的原因,因为它们会让你变成一个愤怒、好斗的人。你总是为了抬高自己和自己喜欢的人而打压别人。它们永远都会存在,没办法,但只要意识到:大多数时候,当你想创造财富时,其实是有别人在攻击你,他们想显得像个道德楷模,但实际上他们是在踩着你抬高自己的地位。

06:54他们只是在玩另一种游戏,而且是更糟的游戏,是零和游戏而不是正和游戏。你在采访前提到的一点让我印象很深,就是你认为每个人都可以变富,而且也许有些致富方式、或者财富这个概念,被其他国家的某些人污名化了。你想展开讲讲吗?是的,我认为存在这么一种观念:赚钱是邪恶的。它一路可以追溯到“金钱是万恶之源”。人们认为银行家偷我们的钱——某种程度上确实如此,因为在世界很多地方,

07:33偷窃一直在大量发生。世界的历史在某种意义上就是生产者与掠夺者之间捕食者—猎物式的关系。有些人出去创造东西、建造东西、为之努力,然后另一些人拿着刀剑、枪炮、税收、裙带资本主义、共产主义等等过来,有各种不同的手段去偷。甚至在自然界,寄生者都比非寄生者多。你体内有大量寄生者靠你活着,其中较好的那些是共生的,会回报些什么,但也有很多纯粹是在索取。任何复杂系统的构造本性如此。

08:07但我关注的是真正的财富创造,不是拿走钱,不是从别人那里拿走什么,而是创造丰盛。显然工作不是有限的,财富也不是有限的,否则我们今天还得坐在山洞里,琢磨怎么分几根柴火,偶尔还有只死鹿。所以文明中大部分财富——其实不是大部分,是全部——都是被创造出来的,它从某处被创造出来:由人创造,由技术创造,由关键的生产力创造,由努力工作创造。所以“财富是被偷来的”这个观念,我认为是一种可怕的零和游戏,那些

08:44想争夺地位的人就在玩这种游戏。但现实是每个人都可以变富,我们只要看到:在第一世界,每个人都几乎比两百年前活着的任何人都富有。而两百年前,没人有抗生素,没人有汽车,没人有电,没人有 iPhone。所以这些都是让我们作为一个物种变得更富有的发明。今天,我宁愿做一个第一世界国家的穷人,也不愿做路易十四时代法国的富人。我宁愿今天做个穷人,也不愿那时做个贵族,而这只是因为财富创造——技术、科学这些被用来创造丰盛的引擎。

09:23所以我认为从根上说,每个人都可以富有。我希望你做一个思想实验:想象每个人都拥有一个优秀软件工程师和一个优秀硬件工程师的知识,如果你能出去建造机器人、计算机、桥梁并给它们编程——假设每个人都懂这些,你觉得二十年后社会会是什么样?我的猜测是:我们会造出机器人、机器、软件和硬件来做一切,我们都会生活在巨大的丰盛中。我们本质上就退休了,因为没人需要为任何基本需求工作。我们甚至会有机器人护士,

10:02会有机器驱动的医院,有自动驾驶汽车,有百分之百自动化的农场,有清洁能源。到那时,我们可以用技术突破得到想要的一切。而如果那时还有人在工作,他们工作是为了表达创造力,他们工作是因为内心就想贡献、建造和设计东西。但我不认为资本主义是邪恶的,资本主义其实是好的。只是它会被劫持:被外部性的错误定价劫持,被腐败或不正当交易劫持,被垄断劫持。资本主义是人类的本质属性,它不是我们

10:45发明的,甚至也不是我们发现的,它与生俱来。在我们每一次交换中——当你和我交换信息,我想从你那里得到一些信息,我给你信息,你给我信息,如果我们的信息交换不够好,你就去找别人谈。所以交换的概念、记录借贷的概念,是刻在我们作为灵活的社会动物身上的。我们是动物界唯一能跨越基因边界合作的物种。大多数动物不合作,即使合作也只在共同进化、共享血缘的群体内合作,所以有共同利益。人类没有这种条件,而让我们能合作的

11:23原因,是我们能记录谁付出了多少、谁贡献了多少的借贷账目。这就是自由市场资本主义的全部。所以我坚信它是人类的本质属性,而我们将为所有人创造越来越多的财富和丰盛。每个人都可以富有,每个人都可以退休,每个人都可以成功。这只是一个教育和意愿的问题。你必须想要它。如果你不想要,那也没关系,你可以退出这场游戏,但别去贬低玩游戏的人,因为正是这场游戏让你夜里睡在温暖舒适的床上,正是这场游戏让你头顶

11:59有片屋顶,正是这场游戏让你的超市货架有货,正是这场游戏让你口袋里的 iPhone 嗡嗡作响。所以这是一场美丽的游戏,在伦理上、理性上、道德上、社会层面对人类都值得去玩,而且它会继续让我们所有人越来越富有,直到任何人只要想要就能获得巨大的财富创造。而且不只是个人在暗暗鄙视财富——有些国家、群体、政党公开鄙视财富,或至少看起来如此。没错。而那些国家、政党和群体,就沦落到玩零和的地位游戏,在这个过程中摧毁财富创造,把所有人拖到他们的水平上。这就是为什么美国是非常受欢迎的

12:41移民国家,因为有美国梦:任何人都可以来到这里,本来很穷,然后拼命工作、赚钱、变富,哪怕只是赚到一些基本的钱。当然,财富的定义对不同人是不一样的。一个第一世界公民对财富的定义可能是“我得赚到几百万美元才算彻底完成”;而对一个刚进入这个国家的第三世界贫穷移民来说——而我们就是贫穷移民,来到美国时我还很小——财富可能就是一个低得多的数字,可能只是“我这辈子不用再做体力劳动”。

13:11但鄙视财富的群体会把整个群体拖到那个水平。如果索取者太多、创造者太少,社会就会崩解。你去共产主义国家看看,看看委内瑞拉:他们忙着拿取、分配、再分配,结果人们在街上真的在挨饿,每年因为纯粹的饥饿掉好几公斤体重。换个角度想:想象一个寄生者过多的生物体,其实你需要少量的寄生者来保持健康,同时你需要大量共生体,比如我们所有细胞里的线粒体,帮我们呼吸、燃烧氧气。这些是帮助我们生存的共生体,没有它们我们活不下去,

13:52但在我看来,它们是创造人体这个财富的伙伴。可如果你体内塞满寄生者——感染了纯粹寄生的蠕虫、病毒或细菌——你就会死。所以任何生物体都只能承受少量寄生者,一旦寄生因素失控,你就会死。所以你知道,我再一次说的是合乎伦理的财富创造,而垄断那类东西,我不是在推崇资本主义,我要说的是像环境这样的外部性定价错误。我说的是自由的心智和自由的市场,人与人之间小规模、自愿、不对他人造成过度影响的交换。但我认为那种

14:30财富创造,如果社会不尊重它、群体不尊重它,那个社会就会陷入毁灭和黑暗。显然我们想变富,而且想在这一生中做到,不必依赖运气。很多人认为赚钱靠运气,不是的,它靠的是成为那种会赚钱的人。我喜欢这样想:如果我失去所有钱,你把我丢在任何一个英语国家的随机一条街上,五到十年内我会再次富有。因为这是一套我发展出来的技能组合,而我认为任何人都能发展出来。在一千个平行宇宙里,你希望

15:06在其中的 999 个里都变富。你不希望只有其中 50 个靠运气。所以我们要把运气这个因素排除掉。运气其实有四种,我们聊过,这来自一本书,Marc Andreessen 为此写过一篇博客文章。运气分不同的种类。第一种,也许可以直接说是盲目的运气,就是我纯粹走运,因为某件完全不在我控制范围内的事发生了。那是好运、那是命。然后是靠坚持、努力、运动带来的运气——就是你在到处跑、创造大量机会、产生大量能量、做很多

15:41事情,很多事情会在尘土中被搅动起来。几乎就像搅拌一个培养皿,看什么会结合;或者混合一堆试剂,看什么会结合。你整个人处在一种力量、拼劲和能量之中,运气会找到你。第三种方式是:你变得非常擅长发现运气。如果你在某个领域非常熟练,那个领域出现幸运的突破时你会注意到,而其他不适应它的人不会注意到。所以你对运气变得敏感,那是技能、知识和努力。最后一种运气是最奇怪、最难的一种,但正是我们要谈的,

16:18就是:你打造出独特的品格、独特的品牌、独特的心智,然后运气来找你。举个例子,假设你是世界上最好的深海潜水员,以承接没人敢尝试的深海潜水闻名。然后纯属偶然,有人在海岸外发现了一艘沉没的宝船,他们拿不到。于是他们的运气变成了你的运气,因为他们会来找你打捞那批宝藏,而你会因此获得报酬。这是个极端的例子,但它说明了:发现宝箱的人得到的是盲目运气,但后来他来找你,

16:59请你把它打捞上来,并且不得不分你一半——那不是运气。你创造了自己的运气,你把自己放在了一个能够利用那种运气、或者吸引那种运气的位置上,而其他人从没为自己创造过那样的机会。所以当我们说“不靠运气”时,我们希望它是确定性的,不想把它交给偶然。你愿意再多讲讲这个想法吗——在一千个平行宇宙里,你想在 999 个里都变富。我想有些人看到会说这听起来不可能,听起来好得不像真的。不,我不认为它不可能。我认为

17:33取决于你的起点,你可能要更努力一点。记住,我是从印度一个穷孩子开始的,所以如果我能做到,任何人都能做到。当然,我四肢健全、心智正常,而且确实受过教育,所以有一些无法绕过的前提条件。但如果你在看这个视频或听这个播客,你大概已经拥有必要的条件:一副能运转的身体和一个能运转的心智。而且我一路也遇到很多坏运气。我赚到的第一笔小钱,立刻在股市里亏光了;我赚到的第二笔小钱,

18:06或者说本应赚到的,被我的商业伙伴骗走了。只有第三次才算顺利,即便那样也是一场缓慢而稳定的挣扎。我这辈子赚钱从来不是一笔巨大的进账,永远是一大堆小事累积起来。所以更多是靠持续创造财富——创建企业、抓住机会、做投资,而不是某个一次性的大事件。我的个人财富不是某一个大年份产生的,它是一次一小块地堆起来的:更多选择、更多生意、更多投资、更多能做的事。就像 AngelList 的某个人,他在网上打造自己的品牌,

18:46做视频。不是哪一个视频会一夜之间让他暴富,而是长期的学习、阅读、创造,这会产生复利。所以我们谈的是变富,好让你能退休、拥有自由。我所说的退休不是什么都不做,而是你不必待在不想待的地方,不必做你不想做的事,你可以想什么时候起就什么时候起,想睡就睡,没有老板——这就是自由。所以我们说的是足够多、能换来自由的财富。尤其多亏了互联网,

19:19如今这些机会极其丰富。事实上我赚钱的方式太多了,时间不够用。机会简直从我耳朵里往外冒,我一直不够用的就是时间。创造财富、创造产品、创造企业、创造机会的方式太多,而作为副产品被社会支付报酬,我根本应付不过来。我觉得挺有意思的是,你描述的前三种运气都有非常常见的俗语,人人都知道;而最后一种运气,来自你独特的行事方式,却没有什么真正的俗语。所以

19:59前三种:有“傻人有傻福”或纯粹运气,那是第一种;第二种运气对应的俗语是“幸运眷顾勇者”,就是那种靠搅动锅子和行动获得运气的人;第三种运气,人们说“机会眷顾有准备的头脑”;但对第四种运气,并没有真正常见的俗语能对应你行动的独特品格,我觉得这很有意思,也许还是机会,也说明人们未必在以应有的方式利用那种运气。我还觉得到那个阶段,它开始变得如此确定,以至于不再是

20:41运气。定义开始从运气淡化,更像命运。所以我会把第四种定义为:你以某种方式塑造品格,然后你的品格成为你的命运。我认为有一件事对赚钱很重要,就是你想要那种名声,让人愿意通过你做交易。我用的例子是:如果你是出色的潜水员,寻宝人会来找你,分你一份宝藏,作为你潜水技能的报酬。如果你是可信、可靠、高诚信、长期思考的交易撮合者,当别人想做交易、却不知道如何与陌生人以可信的方式做成时,他们会真的

21:21来找你,给你一笔分成,或者仅仅因为你建立的诚信和声誉,就给你一个独特的交易。Warren Buffett 会被人送上交易,他能收购公司、能认购权证、能救银行,做别人做不到的事,因为他的声誉。当然这很脆弱,它押上了问责,押上了强大的品牌,而且正如我们后面会谈到的,这伴随问责而来。但我想说,你的品格、你的声誉,是你可以建立的东西,它们让你能够利用别人可能称之为运气的机会,但你

21:57知道那不是运气。你说过第四种运气多多少少是一种命运。原书里有一句话,也出现在 Marc 的博客文章里,出自 Benjamin Disraeli,我想他是英国前首相。用来描述这种运气的话是:“我们创造自己的财富,然后称之为命运。”那篇博客文章里还提到几件关于这种运气的有趣的事,我觉得听众听听会有收获:这第四种运气几乎可以来自你做事时古怪的方式,而这种古怪在这种情况下未必是坏事,

22:39事实上是好事。是的,绝对如此。因为世界是一个非常高效的地方,每个显而易见的地方都被人挖过了,所以要找到新的、新颖的、未被发现的东西,你得在前沿上运作。在前沿,你必须有点古怪,才能独自待在那里;然后你必须愿意比别人挖得更深,深到看起来不理性的程度,只是因为你感兴趣。是的。我见过的、除 Benjamin Disraeli 那句之外,表达这种运气的两句名言:一句来自 Sam Altman,他说“极端的人得到极端的结果”,我觉得说得很好;

23:18另一句来自斯坦福教授 Jeffrey Pfeffer,他说“你不可能做个正常人,却期待不正常的回报”。我一直很喜欢那句。我也喜欢一句意思正好相反的:“玩愚蠢的游戏,赢愚蠢的奖品”。很多人花大量时间玩社交游戏,比如在 Twitter 上,你只是想提高社会地位,结果你基本上赢得了愚蠢的社交奖品,而那些毫无价值。我猜我从这篇博客文章里得到的最后一点是:通过追求这些运气,尤其是最后一种——基本上除了盲目运气之外的所有运气——通过追求它们,你实际上会把坏运气耗尽。

24:01所以如果你只是不停搅锅、搅锅,光是这样你就会把坏运气用光。或者也可能只是均值回归,对,所以你至少把运气中性化了,这样接下来发挥作用的就是你自己的才能。接下来你更具体地讲了你怎么才能真正致富、以及怎么不能致富。第一点是:你不可能靠出租自己的时间致富。你必须拥有股权,拥有一块业务,才能获得财务自由。这大概是整条推文串里绝对最重要的一点。人们似乎以为可以通过工作创造财富、赚钱,但这

24:42大概行不通。原因很多,但最基本的只是:在几乎任何拿薪水的工作里,你的投入和产出紧密相连——即使是时薪很高的工作,比如律师或医生。你仍然在投入小时数,每个小时拿钱。这意味着你睡觉时不赚钱,退休后不赚钱,度假时不赚钱,你无法非线性地赚钱。你看看那些真正变富的医生,是因为他们开了生意,开了私人诊所,诊所建立品牌、品牌吸引人;或者他们

25:17做出某种医疗设备、某项手术或流程,拥有知识产权。所以本质上你在为别人工作,而那个人承担风险、承担问责、拥有知识产权和品牌,所以他们不会付给你足够的钱。他们只会付必须付的最低限度,让你把活干好。那可能是很高的最低限度,但仍然不是那种让你可以退休的真正财富。最后,你其实根本没有为社会创造多少原创的东西。就像我说的,这条推文串本应叫“如何创造财富”,“如何致富”只是更抓人的标题,但

25:50你并没有为社会创造新东西,你只是一遍遍重复做事,本质上你可被替换,因为你在做一个固定角色。大多数固定角色是可以被教的。如果一件事能在学校里教,那么最终你就会和一个拥有更新知识、刚被教出来、正准备取代你的人竞争。你也更可能在做一份最终会被机器人或 AI 取代的工作。而且不一定要一夜之间整体被取代,它可以一点一点被取代,这会侵蚀你的财富创造,也就侵蚀你的赚钱能力。所以从根本上说,你的投入与产出匹配,你可被替换,

26:29而且你没有创造力。我就是不认为那是你真正赚钱的方式。所以每个真正赚到钱的人,在某个时点都拥有一部分产品、企业或某种知识产权。那可以通过股票期权实现。如果你在一家科技公司工作,那是个不错的起点,但真正的财富通常来自创办自己的公司,或者甚至做投资人——他们做投资并买入股权。所以这些才是更主要的致富路径。它不来自小时数。你真正想要的是一份工作、职业或专业,在其中你的投入不影响你的产出。所以如果你

27:05看看现代社会——我后面在推文串里会讲到——高创造力、高杠杆的生意,往往是那种你工作一小时就能产生巨大效果,或者你工作一千小时也可能毫无效果的。比如软件工程:一个伟大的工程师可以创造出 Bitcoin,创造数十亿美元的价值;而一个做错方向、不够好、或者不够有创造力、不够深思的工程师,可以干整整一年,交付的每一行代码、每一样东西,客户都不想要。这就是一种职业的例子——投入与产出高度脱节,它不取决于你投入的小时数。

27:41而在另一个极端,如果你是伐木工,即使是世界上最好的伐木工——假设不用工具,那么投入和产出是真正相连的。他们只用斧头或锯子,世界上最好的伐木工也许只比最差的强三倍,不会有巨大的差别。所以你要寻找那种投入与产出高度脱节的职业和事业。换句话说,你要找有杠杆的东西。而说到杠杆,我不是只指华尔街用、名声不好的金融杠杆,

28:14我说的是工具。我们在使用工具,计算机是软件工程师用的工具。如果我这个伐木工有推土机、自动机械斧和锯子,我就在用工具,就比只用手、试图把树连根拔起的人拥有更多杠杆。工具和杠杆正是造成投入与产出脱节、以及创造力差异的原因。所以一个职业中创造力成分越高,它的投入和产出就越可能脱节。所以我认为,如果你看的职业里投入和产出高度相连,那么在这个过程中创造财富、为自己积累财富会非常非常非常难。

28:53除了出租时间之外,还有什么大的东西要避免?对,我发过两条相关的推文。第一条讲的是啤酒还是什么,讲的是你的生活方式不应升级得太快。那条说:那些生活水平远低于收入的人,享受着那些忙着升级生活方式的人根本无法想象的自由。我觉得这非常重要:不要一直升级生活方式,以保住你的自由。它给你操作上的自由:一旦你赚了点钱,你仍然想活得像个旧的自己,

29:28这样担忧就消失了。所以不要升级房子、生活方式那些东西。假设你将来能一小时赚一千美元,问题是,当你进入那样的工作状态时,你不是突然从一小时赚二十美元跳到一小时赚一千美元,那是漫长职业生涯中的渐进过程。而在这个过程中,一个微妙的问题是,随着你赚得越多,你就越会升级生活方式,而生活方式的升级会抬高你所认为的“财富”门槛,于是你困在工资奴隶的陷阱里。我忘了是谁说的,也许是 Naval 说的——他说,

30:02最危险的东西是海洛因和月薪,因为它们都极易上瘾。你想变富的方式,是先穷着、工作、再工作。比如科技行业就是这样:你十年不赚钱,然后突然在第 11 年可能有一笔巨大的进账。顺便说一句,这也是为什么对所谓富人的极高边际税率是有问题的,因为风险最高、最有创造力的职业,实际上在你的人生中会有十年在亏钱,你承担巨大风险,不断流血、流血,然后突然在第 11 年或第 15 年,你可能有了一笔巨大的进账,

30:37但当然,山姆大叔出现了,说:嘿,你今年赚了很多钱,所以你是富人,所以你是邪恶的,你得把这一切都交给我们。所以这摧毁了这类有创造力的、承担风险的职业。理想情况下,你要把赚钱分成离散的块,间隔很长时间,这样你的生活方式来不及迅速适应,然后你可以说:好了,现在我完成了,我退休了,我自由了。我仍然会工作,因为你总得用你的人生做点什么,但我只做我想做的、在我想做的时候做,更多是

31:12创造性的表达,而不是为了钱。你不会靠出租时间变富,但你说,你会靠给社会提供它想要、但还不知道怎么大规模获得的东西而变富。这没错。本质上——我们之前谈过——金钱是社会给你的欠条,说你过去做了好事,现在我们欠你一些未来的东西。所以社会会为你的创造付钱,只要你创造的是它想要、但它还不知道怎么创造的东西。因为如果它会创造,那就不需要你了,早就会被大量生产出来。你家、你工作场所、街上几乎所有的东西,

31:53都曾是某个时点的技术。石油曾是技术,让 John D. Rockefeller 变富;汽车曾是技术,让 Henry Ford 变富。所以技术只是一组东西,按 Alan Kay 的说法——还不完全管用的东西。一旦某样东西管用了,它就不再是技术了。所以社会永远想要新东西。如果你想富有,你就要找出这些东西里哪一样是你能提供给社会的——它还不知道怎么获得,但它会想要;它对你来说是自然的,在你的技能和能力的范围内。然后你必须想办法把它规模化,因为如果你只做出一个,

32:29那不够,你得做出成千上万个、几十万、几百万甚至几十亿个,让每个人都能有一个。Steve Jobs 和他的团队当然就看明白了:社会会想要一台装在口袋里的智能手机,具备所有电话功能再乘以一百倍,而且好用。所以他们想办法把它造出来,然后想办法规模化,想办法让每一个第一世界公民的口袋里都有一台,最终让每一个第三世界公民也有。正因如此,他们得到丰厚回报,Apple 成为世界上最有价值的公司。我试着这样表述:创业者的工作就是

33:03把高端带入大众市场。它从高端开始,首先是一种创造行为。你先创造,只因为你想要它,你想要它,而你知道怎么造它,你需要它,所以你为自己造出来。然后你弄明白怎么把它带给别人;接着有一段时间,富人拥有它,比如富人那时有黑色豪华轿车,然后 Uber 出现了,每个人的私人司机对所有人都可用。现在你甚至能看到 Uber Pool 在取代穿梭巴士,因为它更方便;再往下还有滑板车,更下沉的市场,

33:37由此再往下。所以你说得对,关键是把富人曾经拥有的东西分发给所有人。但创业者的工作开始得更早,那就是创造。创业本质上是从零创造新事物,预测社会会想要它,然后想办法规模化,以有利可图、自我维持的方式把它带给所有人。我们来看看下一条推文,我觉得它很晦涩,也很有意思,讲的是你可能从事的工作或职业。你说:互联网极大地拓宽了职业的可能空间,大多数人还没弄明白这一点。互联网最根本的属性,超过其他任何单一事物,就是它把地球上每个人

34:20与每个人连接起来。你现在可以触达任何人:可以给人私下发邮件,可以在 Twitter 上广播,可以在 Facebook 上发点东西让他们看到,也可以做个网站让他们来访问。它把每个人连到每个人。所以互联网是一个互联工具,它连接所有人,这就是它的超能力。所以你要利用这一点。它帮你弄明白的是:互联网意味着无论你的受众离你多远,你都能为你的产品、天赋和技能找到他们。比如 Mike,他是插画师,如果他在互联网之前做这些视频,他怎么把信息传出去?

34:59他会怎么做?他会在他住的街区到处跑,给人看,一台电脑或者一块屏幕;或者他试着让它在本地电影院播放。那不可能。它之所以成立,只因为能把它放到网上。而世界上真正对它感兴趣的人有多少?甚至对我们正在聊的这些内容感兴趣、真的会吸收的人有多少?那会是人类中非常小的一部分。关键在于能够触达他们。所以互联网做的是:让任何一种小众痴迷——哪怕是最古怪的东西——都能找到人。可以是收集蛇的人,可以是

35:29喜欢坐热气球的人,可以是喜欢独自环球航行的人——一个人一条船;或者痴迷微型烹饪的人,比如日本那整个微型烹饪现象;或者有个节目讲一个女人走进别人家里帮忙整理。所以无论你有什么小众痴迷,互联网都让它规模化。这不是说你做的东西会成为下一个 Facebook、触达几十亿用户,但如果你只想触达五万个和你有同样热情的同类,那样的受众是存在的。美妙之处在于,这个星球上有七十亿人,人类 DNA 的组合是惊人的,每个人

36:04都完全不同。你永远不会遇到两个哪怕隐约相似、可以相互替代的人。你不能说“也许我结束我的人生,让另一个人进来,他大概跟我差不多,我会得到同样的感受、同样的回应、同样的想法”。不,人是完全独特的,没有替代品。所以既然每个人都有不同的技能、不同的兴趣、不同的痴迷,正是这种多样性成为创造的超级能力。每个人都可以在自己的独特之处上创造性地卓越。但以前这无关紧要,因为如果你住在意大利一个小渔村,你的渔村

36:40根本不需要你那完全独特的技能,你必须服从于仅有的几份可做的工作。但今天,你可以完全独特,你可以上网,找到你的受众,建立生意、创造产品、积累财富,让人快乐,只通过在互联网上独特地表达自己。职业空间被极大拓宽了:电竞选手,有人在 Fortnite 上赚几百万;做视频、上传到 YouTube 的人;主播、博主、播客主。Joe Rogan——我不知道是真是假——但我读到说他靠播客一年能赚一亿美元左右,他的节目有两亿

37:17次下载。连 PewDiePie 也是——前几天有条很好笑的推文说:“PewDiePie 是新闻界最受信任的第一名。” 这是瑞典的一个小伙子,他的分发量是顶级有线新闻网络的三倍,而且还只是在他的新闻频道上,不是他的娱乐频道。互联网让任何小众兴趣——只要你是其中最好的——都能规模化扩展。好消息是,因为每个人都不同,每个人都在某件事上是最好的:就是做自己。我另一条值得插进来、但没放进这条推文串的推文很简单,我喜欢把东西写下来,因为容易记住,也容易

37:54抓住。那条是:“用真实来逃离竞争。” 当你和别人竞争时,是因为你在复制他们,是因为你在试图做同样的事。但每个人都是不同的,不要复制。我知道我们是模仿性动物,René Girard 有整套模仿欲望理论,但其实比那简单得多:不要模仿,不要复制,只做你自己的事。在“做你自己”这件事上,没人能跟你竞争。就这么简单。所以你越是忠实于你是谁、你热爱做什么,你面临的竞争就越少。所以你可以用真实来逃离竞争——当你意识到在“做你自己”这件事上没人能跟你竞争。通常这

38:31在互联网之前是无用的建议,但互联网之后,你可以把它变成职业。聊聊你该考虑进入哪些行业、该做什么样的工作、以及你可能想和谁一起工作。所以你说,应该选择一个能和长期主义的人玩长期游戏的行业。为什么?对,这是理解硅谷为什么奏效、以及高信任社会为什么奏效的一个洞见。本质上,生活中所有的好处都来自复利——无论是关系、赚钱还是学习。所以复利是一种神奇的力量:你从手里的一倍开始,如果每年增长

39:1220%,持续 30 年,那不是 30 年乘以 20% 相加,而是复利,于是一路增长、增长、增长,直到你突然拥有巨大的量——不管是善意、爱、关系还是金钱。所以我认为复利是非常重要的力量,你必须去玩长期游戏,而长期游戏与复利很匹配。长期游戏也有利于信任。如果你看囚徒困境这类博弈,囚徒困境的解是“以牙还牙”,也就是我下次对你做你上次对我做的事,同时带一点宽恕,以防是误会。但那

39:45只在重复囚徒困境中有效。换句话说,如果我们多次玩这个游戏。所以如果你处在这样的情境里,比如你在硅谷,人们彼此做生意,他们认识彼此、信任彼此,那他们就会公平对待彼此,因为他们知道这个人下一局还在。当然这不总是奏效,因为在硅谷你一笔交易就能赚太多钱,有时你们会背叛彼此,因为他们觉得“我赚够了、可以退休了,我不在乎”。所以所有情况都有例外。但本质上,如果你想成功,你必须

40:15和别人一起工作,你必须弄清楚谁能信任、谁能在很长很长的时间里值得信任,让你可以一直和他们玩这个游戏。这样在高信任中,复利会让游戏变得容易,也会让你收获主要回报——回报通常在周期末端。比如 Warren Buffett 作为美国股市的投资人做得非常好,但他能做到这一点的最大原因,是美国股市一直稳定存在,没有在某届糟糕政府期间被政府没收,美国也没有陷入某场战争,

40:49底层平台没有被摧毁。所以在他的情况下,他玩的是长期游戏,信任来自美国股市的稳定。在硅谷,信任来自这个小地理区域里的人群网络,你随着时间弄清楚谁能合作、谁不能。如果你不断换地方、不断换圈子——假设你从木工行业起步,在那里建立了网络,你努力工作,想在木工行业做出一个产品,然后突然出现一个相邻但不同的行业,你在里面其实谁都不认识,你想跳进去赚钱。如果你不断在行业间跳来跳去——

41:22其实比如我需要开一排电动汽车充电站,那可能说得通,可能是最好的机会——但每次你重置、每次你走出你建立网络的地方,你都要从零开始,你不知道该信任谁,他们也不会信任你。还有些行业的人天生是流动的,总是有人进有人出。政治就是一个例子。在政治里,新人不断被选上来。你会看到,当有很多老资格的人,比如参议院里待了很久的职业政客——是的,人们喜欢他们,

41:57缺点是职业政客会腐败;但优点是,他们真的能彼此达成交易,因为他们知道对方十年后还在同一个位置,还得继续打交道,所以他们不如学会合作。而每次来一批新的众议院新人——每两年换一次,大浪潮选举——什么都做不成,因为太多争斗,因为“我刚来,我不认识你,我不知道你还会不会在,我为什么要跟你合作,而不是直接做我认为对的事”。所以重要的是选择一个

42:26能玩长期游戏、和长期的人一起玩的行业。那些人必须发出信号:他们会长期在场,他们有道德,而他们的道德在长期游戏的行为中可见。在长期游戏里,看起来每个人都在让别人变富;在短期游戏里,看起来每个人都在让自己变富。我觉得这个表述非常精彩。是的,在长期游戏里是正和的,我们一起把饼做大,我们努力把它做得尽可能大;在短期游戏里,我们是在分饼。这不是在为社会主义者开脱——那些社会主义者不参与烤饼,却在最后

43:06出现,说“我要一块”或者“我要整张饼”,他们带着枪来。但我认为好的领导者不居功,好的领导者试图激励人们,让团队把活干完,然后按公平、按谁贡献了多少来分配,尽可能接近公平,按谁承担了风险来分,而不是按最后谁的刀最长、最锋利来分。所以接下来这两条推文是:玩重复博弈。人生中所有的回报——无论财富、关系还是知识——都来自复利。是的,当你和某人做生意、和某人做朋友十年、二十年、

43:41三十年,一切只会越来越好,因为你信任他们,摩擦降低了,你们可以一起做越来越大的事。比如最简单的例子:和某人结婚、生孩子、养育孩子,那就是复利。投资那些关系,那些关系会变得无比宝贵,远超随意的关系。健康与健身也是如此:你越健康,保持健康就越容易;而你越是糟蹋身体,恢复就越难,想爬回基线就要付出英雄般的努力。关于复利,我记得不久前看到你转过一条推文,可能是 Ed Latimore 的,

44:16大意是:获得一些牵引力、站稳脚跟,然后别失去它。意思是先获得最初的牵引力,然后永不后退,只是一路往上棘轮式攀升。我不记得原文了,但我觉得那是对的。是的,我小时候——“获得牵引力,别松手”,那是句好话。说到选择合作的人:高智力、高能量、高诚信,我发现这是三条不能妥协的清单。你需要聪明的人,否则他们会朝错误方向走,你最终不会到达正确的地方;你需要高能量的人,因为世界上到处都是聪明但懒惰的

44:53人。我们都认识生活中非常聪明、但你知道就是起不了床、动不了一根手指的人;我们也认识能量很高但不太聪明的人,他们很努力,但方向是错的。而“聪明”不是贬义词,不是说某个人聪明、别人就蠢,而是说每个人在不同的事上聪明。所以取决于你想做好什么,你必须找到在那件事上聪明的人。然后是能量:很多时候人们对某件特定的事毫无动力,但对别的事很有动力。比如某人可能非常没动力去上

45:23一份班、坐在办公室里,但他可能非常有动力去画画。那在这种情况下他就该做个画家,他该把艺术放到互联网上,想办法靠这个建立事业,而不是脖子上套着项圈去做一份沉闷的工作。而高诚信是最重要的,因为否则——即使有了前两个——你得到的是一个聪明又勤奋的骗子,最终会骗你。所以你必须判断这个人是否高诚信。正如我们谈过的,判断的方式是看信号,而信号是他们做了什么,不是他们说了什么,

45:51是那些人们以为没人看着时的非语言行为。说到能量,Sam Altman 不久前有段很有意思的话,他谈授权,甚至说授权最重要的事情之一是把事授权给真正擅长你想做的那件事的人。这是最显而易见的道理,但你似乎应该和那些自然而然地会去做你希望他们做的事的人合作。是的,如果我不觉得某个人真的热衷于我想做的事,我几乎不会跟他开公司、雇他或者合作。我年轻时曾试图

46:29说服别人。我那时以为你可以把一个人“卖”进做某件事,但你不能,你无法长期维持他的动力。你可以在最初激发他,如果你是国王,像亨利五世那样试图让他们冲锋陷阵,然后他们自己会想办法。但如果你想让人长期保持动力,动力必须来自内在,你无法凭空制造,你也不能成为他们的拐杖——如果他们没有那种内在动力。所以你必须确保人们确实高能量、确实想做你希望他们做的事、确实想和你合作。读懂信号

46:57非常非常重要。信号是人们做了什么,而不是他们说了什么。所以要注意微妙的信号。我们都知道,在社交场合,如果一个人对餐厅的服务员态度恶劣,那只是时间问题,他迟早也会这样对你。如果一个人对敌人下手狠、充满报复心,那也只是时间问题,他会把你从朋友重新定义为敌人,让你感受他的怒火。所以愤怒、愤慨、报复心强、短期思维的人,在他们生活的许多互动中本质上都是那样。人出奇地一致,这是你会学到的一件事。所以你要找长期的人,找那些看起来不理性地

47:36讲道德的人。比如我有一个朋友,我投资了他的公司,公司失败了,他本可以让所有投资人颗粒无收,但他经过三次转型,不断追加自己的个人资金,他一直投个人资金,直到公司最终成功。在这个过程中,他从来没有坑过投资人,我一直很感激他。我说:哇,太厉害了,你对你的投资人真好,没有把他们清零。他反而被这话冒犯了,他说:我不是为你们做的,我不是为我的投资人做的,我是为我自己做的,是为了我的自尊,是我在乎的东西,

48:08这就是我生活方式。这就是你想合作的那种人。我喜欢的另一句话,我在推特上发过,我想我是在别处读到的——我不邀功,但我做了一点修改——自尊是你和自己之间的声誉,你永远知道。所以好人、有道德的人、讲伦理的人、好合作的人、可靠的人,往往有很高的自尊,因为他们和自己之间有很好的声誉,他们明白那不是自我。自尊和自我是不同的东西,因为自我可能是不配得的,而自尊至少让你觉得自己达到了自己内心的

48:43道德准则。所以和低诚信的人共事非常难,而判断谁高诚信、谁低诚信也很难。一般来说,一个人越是说自己有道德、有伦理、高诚信,他就越可能不是那样。这很像地位信号:如果你公开争夺地位,如果你已经在谈自己地位高,那是低地位的动作。如果你公开谈自己有多诚实、可靠、值得信任,你大概就没那么诚实可靠。那是骗子的特征。所以是的,选择一个能和长期的人玩长期游戏的行业。我们来看看最后这条推文,

49:22你说:不要和愤世嫉俗者、悲观主义者合伙,他们的信念会自我实现。是的,本质上,要创造东西,你必须是一个理性的乐观主义者。理性,是指你必须去看世界真实的样子,但同时又必须对自己能力、对自己把事情做成的能力保持乐观。我们都认识那种一贯悲观、会否决一切的人。每个人生活里都有那个“乐于助人的批评者”,他以为自己是在帮忙,但实际上是在批评,他对一切都在泼冷水。那种人不仅自己一辈子做不成任何伟大的事,还会阻止身边的人做成伟大的事。他们认为自己的工作是

50:01在东西上打洞。打洞没问题,只要你能提出解决方案。还有那句经典的军事说法:“我来领导、跟随,或者让开。” 而这些人想要第四个选项:他们不想领导、不想跟随,但也不想让开,他们想告诉你这件事为什么行不通。而我认识的所有真正成功的人都有很强的行动偏向,他们直接去做。判断一件事是否可行,最容易的办法就是去做,至少做第一步、第二步、第三步,然后再决定。所以如果你想在人生中成功——创造财富、拥有良好的关系、保持健康,甚至只是快乐——你需要有朝着目标行动的偏向,而且你必须

50:42对此乐观。不是盲目乐观——没有比一个莽撞蛮干的人更糟的了,那不是乐观,那是莽撞。你要做理性的乐观主义者,但要理性:了解所有陷阱、了解下行风险,同时仍然抬起下巴。我的意思是,你在这个星球上只有一次生命,为什么不试着建点大的东西?这就是 Elon Musk 的美妙之处,也是我认为他激励了那么多人的原因:他承接真正巨大、大胆的任务,为人们提供了一个大胆思考的榜样。而即使建小东西也需要大量工作。我不认为街角杂货店老板比 Elon Musk 付出的努力更少、

51:16流的汗、受的累更少,甚至可能更多。但不管什么原因——教育、境遇——他们没机会去大胆思考,所以结果也没那么大。所以最好还是大胆思考,当然要在你能力范围内理性地思考。保持乐观。愤世嫉俗者和悲观主义者真正在说的是——很不幸——他们在说:我放弃了,我认为我做不成任何事,所以世界在我看来就是个没人能做成任何事的世界,那你为什么还要去做?因为如果你失败了,我就对了,这很好;但如果你成功了,你就让我显得很差劲。是的,做个非理性的乐观主义者,大概比

51:53做个理性的愤世嫉俗者更好。是的,有一个完全理性的框架解释你为什么该乐观:历史上,回到两千年、五千年、一万年前,两个人在丛林里走,听到老虎,一个是乐观主义者,说“它没往我们这边来”;另一个说“我是悲观主义者,我先走了”。悲观主义者跑了,活下来;乐观主义者被吃了。所以我们是悲观主义者的后代,我们在基因上天生就是悲观主义者。但现代社会安全得多,街上没有老虎游荡,你最终彻底毁灭的可能性非常低——尽管你仍应避免彻底毁灭。而如果上行无限、

52:31下行有限,那么更可能的情况是……所以适应现代社会意味着要覆盖你的悲观本能,去下略微非理性乐观的赌注,因为上行是无限的。如果你创立下一个 SpaceX、Tesla 或 Uber,你可以为社会、为自己创造数十亿美元的价值,改变世界。如果你失败了,那有什么大不了的?你损失了投资人几百万美元,他们还有很多钱,他们承担的就是这种赌注,赌你会成功。在过去做悲观主义者是合理的,今天做乐观主义者是合理的,尤其如果你受过教育、生活在第一世界国家。其实第三世界国家的经济机会

53:08大得多。你必须避免的一件事是毁灭风险。毁灭意味着出局,所以不要做任何违法的事——穿橙色囚服永远不值得;也要避免彻底的灾难性损失,这意味着你要避开可能造成身体危险、伤害身体的事,你必须注意健康;也要避开可能让你失去全部资本、全部积蓄的事,不要一次赌上一切。但你要下理性乐观、上行为巨大的赌注。我认为有些人会试图建立你的想法、在你的想法上添砖加瓦,无论它们看起来多离谱;而

53:43另一些人会把所有显而易见的例外都列出来,无论它们多显而易见。幸运的是,在创业世界里,我几乎接触不到那些给你列出显而易见例外、列出所有为什么行不通的理由的人。我几乎已经接触不到了。今天那个论坛上,Scott Adams 被这类人烦得不行,于是他想出了一个短语和缩写:BOC,也就是“但是当然,总有显而易见的例外”,他曾经有段时间把这缩写钉在文章末尾。但推特上到处都是挑刺的人,而正如你指出的,硅谷已经学到:上行

54:21如此之大,以至于你绝不会看不起那个穿连帽衫、鞋上有咖啡渍、看起来邋里邋遢的孩子,因为你不知道他会不会成为下一个 Mark Zuckerberg 或下一个 Reid Hoffman。所以你必须尊重每个人,必须看重每一种可能和机会,因为上行是无限的,下行是有限的。在现代世界,尤其是有了金融资产和工具,你想聊聊你需要的技能,特别是特定知识、问责、杠杆和判断力。所以这个领域的第一条推文是:用特定知识、问责和杠杆武装自己。我还要加上判断力,

55:05我想你在那条推文里没提到它。如果你想赚钱,你必须能规模化地拿到报酬——为什么是你?那是规模化问责;那是杠杆;而拿到报酬的是你而不是别人,那是特定知识。所以特定知识大概是整条推文串里最难传达的东西,也大概是人们最容易搞混的东西。问题在于我们有这样一种观念:一切都可以被教,一切都可以在学校里教。但并非一切都能被教。事实上,最有趣的东西是无法教的。东西可以被学,而这种学习往往要么来自你 DNA 里某种天生的

55:47特质,要么来自你的童年——你学到了软技能,而这些软技能在人生后期极难教;要么它是全新的东西,所以别人也都不知道怎么做;要么它是真正的在职训练,因为你在高度复杂的环境里做模式匹配,在某个特定领域里建立判断力。经典例子是投资,但也可以是任何领域:可以是管理一支卡车车队的判断,可以是天气预报的判断。所以特定知识是你在乎的知识,尤其如果你年纪稍长——比如你 20、21、22 岁以后,你几乎不能选择自己拥有哪种特定知识,而是

56:28你去看自己到那时已经建成了什么,然后可以在上面继续搭建。关于特定知识,第一件要注意的事是:你无法通过培训获得它。如果它可以通过培训获得——如果去上课就能学到特定知识——那么别人也能被培训出来,然后我们就可以大规模生产、大规模培训人,甚至我们可以给计算机编程来做这件事,最终我们能让机器人四处走来做这件事。所以如果是那样,你就极其可被替换,我们付给你的只是让你干活的最低工资,因为还有很多其他可被培训的索取者。所以你的回报最终就退化为你的培训成本,加上那笔培训的投资回报。所以你真正要获取的是特定

57:10知识。你需要学校教育、需要训练,才能利用最好的特定知识,但其中真正被付钱的部分是特定知识。比如一个人去拿了个心理学学位,然后去做销售。如果他本来就是个厉害的销售,本来就有很强的销售能力,那心理学学位就是杠杆,武装了他,让他在销售上做得更好。但如果他一直是个内向的人、销售一直不好,却想用心理学来学销售,他就是不会做得多好。所以特定知识更多是通过追求你天生的才能、真正的好奇心和热情来发现的,

57:48而不是去学校学当下最热门的职业,也不是进入当下最热门的领域。特定知识常常处在知识的前沿,也常常是刚刚被弄明白的东西,或者是极难弄明白的东西。所以如果你不是百分之百投入,另一个百分之百投入的人就会超过你,而且不会只超过你一点点,而是会超过你很多,因为现在我们处在想法的领域,复利真正起作用,杠杆真正起作用。所以如果你带着一千倍的杠杆运作,一个人正确率 80%,另一个人正确率 90%,那个

58:27正确率 90% 的人,市场付给他的钱会多出几百倍,因为杠杆,因为正确的复利效应。所以你必须确保自己真的擅长它。所以真正的好奇心非常重要。很多时候它不是坐下来推理出来的,更多是通过观察发现的。你几乎要回看自己的人生,看看自己实际擅长什么。比如我想成为科学家,我的很多道德等级都来自那里。我把科学家看作人类生产链的顶端,那些做出真正突破和贡献的科学家群体

59:03大概比任何其他单一人类群体为人类社会增加的东西都多。这不是要贬低艺术、政治、工程或商业,但如果没有科学,我们今天大概还在扒拉泥土、拿棍子打架、试着生火。我整个价值体系都是围绕科学家建立的,我想成为一个伟大的科学家。但当我真正回看自己独特擅长什么、以及最终把时间花在什么上,那更多是关于赚钱、摆弄技术、向人推销东西、解释事情、和人交谈。所以我有一些销售技能,那是我拥有的一种特定知识;我

59:41有一些关于如何赚钱的分析技能,我有吸收数据、对它着迷、拆解它的能力,那是我拥有的一种特定技能。我也就是喜欢摆弄技术,所有这些对我来说都像玩,但对别人看起来像工作。所以对另一些人来说,这些事会很难,他们会说:我怎么才能变得善于精炼地表达、推销想法?如果你本来就不擅长,或者你不是真的喜欢,也许那不是你的菜。专注于你真正喜欢的东西。说来讽刺,第一个真正指出我特定知识的人,

1:00:15是我母亲。她是在厨房里随口说的,那时我大概 15、16 岁,我跟一个朋友说我想成为天体物理学家,她说:不,你会去做生意。我当时想:什么?我妈告诉我我会做生意?我要做天体物理学家,我妈根本不知道自己在说什么。但我妈完全知道自己在说什么。她已经观察到,每次我们走在街上,我都会点评当地的披萨店:为什么他们这样卖披萨切片、放这些配料,为什么点单流程是这样,

1:00:44而本应该是那样。所以她知道我更多是有一颗商业好奇的头脑。但后来我对科学的痴迷结合起来,创造了技术和科技企业,我就在那里找到了自己。所以很多时候你的特定知识是被观察到的,而且常常是被熟悉你的人观察到的,在情境中显露出来,而不是你自己想出来的。就特定知识被教授的部分而言,那是在工作中、通过学徒制进行的,这就是为什么最好的企业、最好的职业是学徒制职业,因为那些是社会还没弄明白怎么培训和自动化的东西。这里有一句经典的话:Warren Buffett 毕业后去找 Benjamin Graham,

1:01:20Benjamin Graham 是《聪明的投资者》的作者,某种程度上现代化、或者说开创了价值投资这门学科。Warren Buffett 去找 Benjamin Graham,提出免费为他工作,Graham说:其实你太贵了,免费都太贵了。Graham 完全正确:当涉及像 Graham 要给 Buffett 的那种极有价值的学徒机会时,Buffett 本应付给他很多钱。这一点本身就告诉你,那些是值得掌握的技能。特定知识也往往既有技术性又有创造性,所以处在技术的最前沿、艺术的最前沿、传播的最前沿。即使在今天,

1:01:58比如互联网上大概有一些“梗王”,能创造出极其精彩的梗,把想法传播给几百万的人;或者非常有说服力。比如 Scott Adams 就是个好例子,他本质上正在成为世界上最有可信度的人之一,靠的是通过有说服力的论证和视频做出准确预测。那是他多年来建立起来的特定知识,因为他年轻时痴迷催眠,他学了如何通过漫画来沟通,他很早拥抱了 Periscope,所以他练习了大量对话,他读遍了这个话题的所有书,他在日常生活中运用它。你看看他的女朋友,她就像个漂亮的年轻

1:02:36Instagram 模特——这就是一个人在其职业生涯中建立起特定知识的例子。它高度有创造性,带有技术成分,而且永远不会被自动化,没有人能从他身上拿走,因为他同时以 Scott Adams 这个品牌承担问责,并且用媒体的杠杆运作:Periscope、画 Dilbert 漫画、写书。他在那个品牌之上拥有巨大的杠杆,可以从中创造财富——如果他想要在已有的之外再创造更多财富的话。我们是不是该叫它“独特知识”,“特定知识”是否更说得通?你知道,

1:03:13我是在很年轻的时候想出这个框架的,那是几十年前的事了,大概有三十多年。当时“特定知识”这个词让我记住了,所以我就这么想它。我没试着改掉它的原因,是我为它找到的每个其他词都在另一种意义上被过度使用了,至少“特定知识”没那么常用。我可以给它重新命名,大概“独特知识”……也许它确实独特,但如果我从别人那里学到它,它就不再独特了,因为我们都知道了。所以与其说它独特,不如说它高度具体:它具体对应情境,具体对应个人,它具体

1:03:48对应问题,而且它只能作为更大的痴迷、兴趣和在该领域投入时间的一部分被建立起来。它不能直接从一本书里读出来,也不能在一门课里被教,也不能被编程进单一算法。说到 Scott Adams,他有一篇博客文章讲如何建立职业生涯:在三个或更多领域进入前 25%,这样你就成为世界上唯一一个能在这三件事上都处于前 25% 的人。所以与其试图在一件事上做到最好,不如试着在三件或更多事情上做到非常非常好。这是建立特定知识的一种方式吗?你认为最好的方式就是跟随你自己的痴迷,同时在心里某个角落意识到:其实这个痴迷——我会留意

1:04:44它的商业层面。但我认为,如果你到处试图过于刻意地建立它,如果你过于以钱为目标导向,你就不会选到对的东西,你不会真正选到那件你热爱去做的事,所以你不会深入得足够。Scott Adams 的观察很好,它建立在统计之上。假设今天对人类有价值的知识领域有一万个,而这一万个位置上的第一名都已被占据——除非你恰好是全世界在某件事上最痴迷的一万人之一,否则每个领域的第一名很可能已经是别人了。

1:05:18但当你开始组合——比如把第 3000、第 7000 或第 28000 名,配上顶尖的销售技能、很好的写作技能,再加上精通会计和金融——当那个交叉点的需求出现时,你就从一万个扩展到了数百万、数千万个组合,竞争就小得多。而且存在边际递减,所以在三四个领域做到前 25% 要容易得多,而不是真正在某件事上做到第一。我认为这是个非常务实的做法,但我认为重要的是不要刻意去拼装这些东西,因为你确实要选那些你

1:06:00有天赋的事。每个人都有天赋所在,我们都熟悉“天生”这个词:这个人是天生的交际者,这个人是天生的社交达人,这个人是天生的程序员,这个人是天生的读者。所以无论你天生擅长什么,你都要在那上面加倍投入。而且你大概在多个方面都有天赋,因为人格和人都非常复杂。所以我们希望能把你天生擅长的事情组合起来,这样你纯粹出于兴趣和享受,就自动在某几件事上进入前 25%、前 10% 或前 5%。说到组合技能,你说

1:06:39应该学销售、学建造。如果你两样都会,你将势不可挡。你知道,现在这是个非常宽泛的类别,但它是两大类:一是建造产品,这很难,而且是多变量的,可以包括设计、开发、制造、物流、采购,甚至可以是设计和运营一项服务。它有很多很多定义,但在每个行业里都有对“建造者”的定义。在我们科技行业,那是 CTO,是程序员、软件工程师、硬件工程师。但即使在洗衣生意里,也可以是那个建立洗衣服务的人,那个让列车准点运行的人,那个

1:07:20确保所有衣服在正确的时间到达正确的地方的人,等等。另一边是销售侧。同样,销售的定义也非常宽泛,销售实际上不只是卖给单个客户,也可以是营销、沟通、招聘、融资、激励人、做公关。所以它是一个宽泛的伞形类别。一般来说,硅谷的创业模式倾向于快速见效。这不是唯一的方式,但大概是最常见的方式:两个创始人,一个在销售上世界级,一个在建造上世界级。例子当然是 Steve

1:07:59Jobs 和 Steve Wozniak 创办 Apple;Gates 和 Allen 早期在 Microsoft 大概也有类似的分工;Larry 和 Sergey 大概也沿着这条线分工,虽然那里有些不同,因为那是一个非常技术性的产品,通过简单的界面交付给终端用户。但总的来说,你会看到这个模式反复出现:有一个建造者,有一个销售者;有一个 CEO 和一个 CTO 的组合。风险投资和科技投资人几乎被训练成尽可能寻找这个组合,这是神奇的组合。终极情况是一个人可以两者都做,那时你就得到了真正的超级能力,那时你就得到了能创造整个行业的人。活生生的例子是 Elon Musk,他可能不

1:08:39亲自造火箭,但他懂得足够多,实际上能做出技术贡献;他对技术理解得足够好,没人能在技术上糊弄他;而且他不会到处宣称自己认为最终无法交付的事。他在时间表上可能乐观,但他认为那在合理可交付的范围内。连 Steve Jobs 都培养了足够的产品技能,深度参与产品,所以他也在这两个领域同时运作。Larry Ellison 起步是程序员,我想他写了 Oracle 的第一版,实际上深度参与其中。Marc Andreessen 也在这个领域——他也许在销售技能上不够自信,但他是那个写 Netscape Navigator 的程序员,写了其中很大一部分。

1:09:16所以我认为任何领域里真正的巨人,都是既能建造又能销售的人。通常建造这件事,销售人员后来是捡不起来的——建造需要太多专注的时间;但建造者可以稍后学会销售,尤其如果他本来就天生是个好的沟通者。Bill Gates 有句著名的转述:我宁愿教一个工程师做营销,也不愿教一个营销人员做工程。我认为如果你以建造者的心态起步、有建造技能,而且在你人生中还算早、或者你有足够的专注时间,让你觉得自己能学会

1:09:57销售,而且你有一些天生的好销售特质,那你就可以在这些上加固。现在你的销售技能可以不在传统领域,比如假设你是个很好的工程师,然后人们说:现在你得擅长销售了。你可能不擅长面对面销售,但你可能是个很好的写作者,而写作是比面对面销售容易学得多的技能,所以你可能就培养写作能力,直到你成为一个好的线上沟通者,然后用它来做销售。另一方面,也可能你是个好的建造者,但不擅长

1:10:31写作,也不喜欢面向大众沟通,而是擅长一对一。那你可以把销售技能用在招聘或融资上,这些更是一对一的事情。这说明,如果你处在这两者的交叉点,不要绝望,因为你不会成为最好的技术专家,也不会成为最好的销售人员,但奇怪的是,这种组合——回到 Scott Adams 的技能栈——这种组合是不可阻挡的。长期来看,那些理解底层产品、知道怎么建造、又能卖的人,对投资人来说就像猫薄荷。这些人只要有足够的能量,就能破墙,几乎能把任何事

1:11:08做成。如果只能选一个来擅长,你会选哪个?当你试图从噪音中脱颖而出时,建造其实更好,因为有太多投机者和销售员背后什么都没有,支撑。刚起步、想被认可时,建造更好。但在远为后期,建造会让人疲惫,因为它是一项需要专注的工作,也很难保持前沿,因为总有新人、新产品带着更新的工具、坦白说更多时间出现,因为那是非常密集、非常专注的任务。所以销售技能其实随时间更容易规模化。比如,如果你有“做出好产品”的声誉,那很好,但

1:11:48当你发布新产品时,我会根据产品本身来评估它;但如果你有“和你做生意是件好事”的声誉,而且你有说服力、善于沟通,那这份声誉几乎会自我实现。所以我认为如果只能选一个,你可以从建造开始,然后转向销售。这是个和稀泥的答案,但我认为那实际上是正确答案。在我们谈问责、杠杆和判断力之前,你在更下面还有几条推文,我会把它们归入“持续学习”这一类。它们本质上是:没有一种技能叫“商业”。别读商业杂志,别上商业课。学微观经济学、博弈论、心理学、说服、伦理、数学

1:12:34和计算机。你在一次 Periscope 里还说过一句话:你应该能从图书馆里拿起任何一本书来读。这一类里最后一条推文是:阅读比听快,做比看快。是的。关于这一点最重要的一条推文,很不幸我甚至没放进来,那就是:学习的基础是阅读。我不认识一个不读书、不一直读书的聪明人。问题是:我该读什么?我怎么读?因为对大多数人来说,难就难在这里,很短。所以最重要的是学会如何自我教育,而自我教育的方式是培养

1:13:10对阅读的热爱。所以我漏掉的那条、我一直暗示的推文是:读你爱读的,直到你爱上阅读。就这么简单。我认识的每个读很多书的人都热爱阅读,他们热爱阅读,是因为他们读自己热爱的书。这有点像是第22条军规式的循环,但你要从随便哪里开始读,然后不断积累,直到阅读成为习惯,然后最终你会对简单的东西感到厌倦,所以你可能从小说开始读,然后升级到科幻,再升级到非虚构,再升级到科学、哲学、数学或别的什么。

1:13:45但走你自己的自然路径,只读让你感兴趣的东西,直到你理解它们,然后你自然会转向下一个、再下一个、再下一个。现在这里有一个例外,就是我刚才暗示的、你真正该学的东西:到了某个时点,外面可读的东西太多了,而且连阅读都充满垃圾。确实有一些东西你可以读,尤其在早期,它们会以某种方式给你的大脑编程;然后你后来读到的东西,你会根据早先读到的东西来判断真假。所以读基础性的东西很重要。

1:14:18而基础性的东西,我会说是某个领域的原典,它们在性质上非常科学。比如,与其读一本商业书,不如拿起 Adam Smith 的《国富论》;与其读一本今天写的生物学或演化论的书,我会拿起 Darwin 的《物种起源》;与其读一本当下非常前沿的生物技术书,我会拿起 Watson和 Crick 的《创世纪的第八天》;与其读关于宇宙学、Neil deGrasse Tyson 和 Stephen Hawking 说了什么的高深著作,你可以拿起 Richard Feynman 的《六堂Easy物理课》,从基础物理开始。如果你理解基础,尤其是在

1:14:57数学、物理和科学上,那你就不会害怕任何书。我们都有那样的记忆:坐在教室里学数学,一切都很逻辑、都说得通,直到某个时刻课程讲得太快,我们跟不上了。从那以后,我们就只能背公式、背概念,无法从第一性原理推导它们。那一刻我们就迷失了,因为除非你是职业数学家,你不会记得那些东西。你只会记得技巧和基础。所以你必须确保自己在钢架上搭建理解,因为你是在为一座摩天大楼打地基,而不是仅仅

1:15:37在背东西。因为如果你只是在背,你就完了。所以基础全是重要的。而终极境界是:你走进一座图书馆,上下打量,你不害怕任何一本书。你知道你可以从架上取下任何一本书,你能读它、理解它、吸收其中真实的部分、拒绝虚假的部分,而且你有依据来判断,那依据是逻辑的、科学的,而不纯粹基于观点。互联网的美妙之处是,整个亚历山大图书馆乘以十倍,随时随地都在你指尖。稀缺的不是教育手段或

1:16:15学习手段,学习手段是丰富的,稀缺的是学习的欲望。所以你必须培养那种欲望。其实甚至不是培养,而是不要失去它。孩子天生有好奇心。如果你去看一个刚开始学语言的幼儿,他几乎总在问:这是什么?那是什么?为什么这样?那是谁?他们总在问问题。但问题之一是,学校、我们的教育体系,甚至我们养育孩子的方式,用顺从替换了好奇。一旦你用顺从替换了好奇,你就得到一个听话的工厂工人,但你不再得到有创造力的思考者。而你需要创造力,你需要那种喂养自己

1:16:55大脑、学习任何你想学的东西的能力。对我来说,基础性的东西是原理,是算法,是深层的逻辑理解——你可以从任何角度为它辩护或攻击它。这就是微观经济学重要的原因,因为宏观经济学很多是记忆。很多宏观——正如 Nassim Taleb 所说,做宏观比做微观容易,因为宏观经济学是巫毒式的复杂科学遇上政治。如今你找不到两个能就任何事达成一致的宏观经济学家,不同的宏观经济学家被不同的政客用来推销各自偏爱的理论。现在甚至有宏观经济学家在推销所谓“现代货币理论”,说:嘿,除了那个讨厌的通胀问题,我们可以想印多少钱就印多少钱。

1:17:39对,除了那个讨厌的通胀问题。这就像说:既然能源有限,我们可以整天往太空发射火箭。这纯属胡说。但有人的头衔里就写着“宏观经济学家”,却在推销现代货币理论,这本身就告诉你:作为一门所谓科学的宏观经济学已经被腐蚀了,它是政治的一个分支。所以你要真正专注于基础。终极的基础是数学和逻辑。如果你理解逻辑和数学,你就有了理解科学方法的基础。一旦你理解科学方法,你就能理解如何在其他领域、在你正在读的其他东西里区分真与假。所以

1:18:21读别人的观点要非常小心,甚至读“事实”也要小心,因为所谓的事实往往只是观点,只是外面裹了一层糖衣。你真正要找的是算法,你真正要找的是理解。慢慢读一本书、挣扎、绊倒、倒回去,比快速翻过去说“好了,我读了 20 本书、30 本书、我读了这个领域的 50 本书”要好。就像 Bruce Lee 说的:我不怕练过一千种腿法、一千种拳法的人,我怕的是把一种拳练了一万次、把一种腿法练了一万次的人。真正让你成为聪明思考者的,是

1:19:00通过重复、使用和逻辑、基础得来的理解。要为你余生的学习打下基础,我认为你需要两样东西——如果我试着总结的话:一是实用的说服力,二是你需要在某个技术类别里深入,不管是抽象数学,还是读 Donald Knuth 关于算法的书,还是读 Feynman 的物理学讲义。如果你有实用的说服力,又对某个复杂话题有深入理解,我认为你就为余生的学习打下了极好的基础。是的,如果我再展开一点,我会说最重要的五项

1:19:48技能当然是阅读、写作、算术,然后再加上说服——就是我们正在谈的——最后我会加上计算机编程,因为它只是算术的一种应用形式,在你所从事的任何领域都能给你带来极大的免费杠杆。如果你擅长计算机、擅长基础数学、擅长写作、擅长讲话,而且你喜欢阅读,你这辈子就有底了。所以从这个意义上说,商业对我来说是桶底。根本没有一种真正的技能叫“商业”,它太泛了。就像一种叫“与人相处”的技能——和人打交道——那不是技能,它太宽泛了。所以商学院里发生的很多事——

1:20:28商学院里确实教一些非常聪明的东西,我不需要完全否定它们——但商学院里试图做的一些事本质上只是轶事,他们叫它“案例研究”,但那只是轶事,他们试图通过扔给你大量数据点来帮你做模式匹配。但现实是,除非你自己真的处在那个位置,否则你永远不会完全理解它们。即使到那时,你也会发现博弈论、心理学、伦理、数学、计算机和逻辑的基本概念会对你更有用得多。所以我会聚焦基础,会带着科学的倾向,会培养对阅读的热爱,

1:21:03包括读那些所谓的“垃圾食品”——你不该读的东西。你不必读经典。这就是你自我教育的基础。你说“做比看快”是什么意思?当你来到自己的学习曲线前,如果你想优化学习曲线,我不太喜欢播客的原因之一——尽管我自己就是播客的产出者——是我喜欢非常快地消费信息。现在我是个好的阅读者、快速阅读者,我可以读得很快,但听只能以某个速度听。我知道有人用 2 倍、3 倍速听,但每个人听起来都像花栗鼠,而且很难倒回去,很难

1:21:37做标记,很难定位片段、存到笔记本里等等。同样,很多人以为可以通过看别人做、甚至通过读别人做,就能在某件事上变得非常熟练,回到商学院案例研究的例子,那是个典型的例子:他们研究别人的企业。但现实中,你经营自己的柠檬水摊或类似的东西,或者哪怕只是在街上开一家小零售店,你会学到更多关于经营生意的东西。那是你在职学习的方式,因为很多微妙之处只有你真正进入生意才会显现出来。比如现在每个人都在讲“思维模型”,

1:22:13对吧?你去 Farnam Street,你去《穷查理宝典》,你可以学到各种不同的思维模型。但哪些更重要?哪些你更常用?在什么情况下重要?那才是难的部分。比如我个人的学习是:委托—代理问题驱动了这个世界上的太多东西,那是个激励问题。我学到的是:以牙还牙、重复囚徒困境是最值得了解的博弈论知识。在那之后你几乎可以把博弈论的书放下。最后,学博弈论最好的方式是玩大量游戏。我甚至没读过博弈论的书。我认为自己极其擅长博弈论。我

1:22:50从来没有翻开一本博弈论书,看到某个结论后想:哦对,这对我就是常识。原因是,我从小玩各种游戏长大,我在各种朋友之间遇到各种边界情况,所以它对我来说是第二天性。所以你总是可以通过在职做事学得更好。但“做”是一件微妙的事,我们刚刚把它压缩了,它有很多内容。比如,假设我想学如何经营生意。如果我开一家店,每天进去和 Sam 一起做同样的事,经营街上那家零售店,每天往货架上摆食品和酒,我不会学到多少,因为我在大量重复。所以我投入了数千小时,但那是数千小时做同样的事。而如果

1:23:33我投入的是数千次迭代,那就不同了。所以学习曲线是跨迭代的。如果我一直尝试新的营销实验,我不断更换库存,我不断更换品牌和信息传达,我不断更换招牌,我不断更换用来带来客流的线上渠道,我尝试不同的营业时间,如果我有能力到处走走、和其他店主交谈、看他们的账本、弄清楚他们怎么经营,那是迭代次数驱动学习曲线。所以你能有的迭代越多、射门

1:24:07次数越多,你学得越快。这不仅仅是投入小时数,实际上是两者的结合。但我认为,就我们的构造方式和世界呈现自己的方式而言,世界很容易给我们机会一遍又一遍做同样的事。但实际上,如果我们离开去找到从零做新事情的方法,会更有益。而第一次做新事是痛苦的,因为你走进了未知领域,而且很可能你会失败。所以你必须对频繁的小失败非常自在。Nassim Taleb 也谈过这个,他

1:24:47靠做依赖黑天鹅的交易员赚到了财富。Nassim Taleb 赚钱的方式本质上是每天亏一点小钱,然后偶尔当别人眼中的不可想象之事发生时,他赚一大笔。而大多数人想每天赚一点小钱,作为交换,他们容忍大量爆仓风险,容忍彻底破产。我们可不参与每天流一点血;如果你在自然环境中被划伤,每天真的在流血,你最终会死,你必须止住那道伤口。我们进化成喜欢小胜利、一直有小胜利,但那会变得非常

1:25:25昂贵。那是人群所在,是羊群所在。所以如果你愿意每天流一点血,作为交换你以后大赢,你会做得更好。顺便说一句,这就是创业:创业者每天都在流血,他们不赚钱,他们在亏钱,他们持续承压,所有责任都在他们身上。但当他们赢了,他们赢得很大,平均而言他们会赚更多。所以我们为什么不跳进“问责”这个话题——我觉得它相当有意思,而且我认为你有自己独特的看法。关于问责的第一条推文是:拥抱问责,以自己的名义承担商业风险。社会会以责任、股权和杠杆回报你。所以要想变富,

1:26:07你知道你需要杠杆。杠杆来自劳动力、来自资本,也可以通过代码或媒体获得。但这些大多数——比如劳动力和资本——必须由别人给你。劳动力,必须有人追随你;资本,必须有人给你钱或资产去管理,或者给你机器。所以要获得这些东西,你必须建立可信度,而且你必须尽可能以自己的名义去做,这有风险。所以问责是一把双刃剑:事情顺利时它让你拿到功劳,事情糟糕时它让你承担冲击。所以从这个意义上说,那些把名字印在东西上的人

1:26:40不是愚蠢,他们只是自信。也许最终证明是愚蠢的,但如果你看 Kanye、Oprah、Trump、Elon 或任何这样的人,他们光靠名字就能变富,因为他们的名字本身就是强大的品牌。不管你如何看待 Trump,你都必须意识到,这个人在“给自己的名字做品牌”这件事上属于世界顶尖。你为什么去 Trump 赌场?就因为 Trump。为什么去 Trump Tower?因为 Trump。到了投票的时候,我想很多选民只是走进去说“Trump”,他们认这个名字。所以名字的辨识度得到了

1:27:11回报。Oprah 也一样,她把品牌、名字放在某样东西上,它就卖断货,就像即时认证。但这些人也为把名字放出去承担风险。显然 Trump 现在大概被这个国家一半或一半以上的人憎恨,也被世界很大一部分人憎恨。他把名字摆出去;把名字摆出去,你就成了名人,而名气有很多很多下行。做匿名而富有的人,比做贫穷而著名的人更好;但即使既著名又富有,也有很多下行,你永远在公众视野中。所以问责在你打造

1:27:44产品、在团队里工作、在企业里工作时相当重要。我们不断被灌输团队合作有多重要,我完全同意。我们在社会层面受到的很多训练都在告诉我们不要从人群中探出头。这是我从澳大利亚朋友那里听到的说法:高罂粟会被割掉,对吧?别把头探出去。但我想说,实际上一个真正运作良好的团队很小,而且每个不同部分都有清晰的问责。所以你可以说:好,这个人负责打造产品,这个人负责信息传达,这个人负责融资,

1:28:21这个人负责定价策略,也许还有线上广告。所以如果有人搞砸了,你确切知道谁负责;同时如果某件事进展顺利,你也确切知道谁负责。所以如果你有一个小团队、职责划分清楚,你仍然可以保持很高的问责水平。问责真的很重要,因为当某件事成功或失败时——如果失败,所有人互相指责;如果成功,所有人都往前站来抢功劳。我们都有过那种经历:在学校做小组作业,里面大概有几个人

1:28:58干了很多活,还有几个人只是在表演、或者在干活。所以我们都从童年就熟悉这种事,但谈起来让人不舒服,但清晰的问责很重要。没有问责,你就没有激励;没有问责,你就无法建立可信度。但你要承担风险:承担失败的风险,承担被羞辱的风险,以你自己的名义承担失败的风险——你知道,幸运的是现代社会没有债务人监狱了,人们不会因为亏了别人的钱而坐牢或被处死。但我们在社会层面仍然被硬性设定为不要以自己的名义公开失败。而那些

1:29:32有能力以自己的名义公开失败的人,实际上获得了很大的力量。比如我举个个人例子:直到 2013、2014 年左右,我的公众形象完全围绕创业和投资,直到 2014-2015 年我才开始谈哲学、心理和更广泛的东西,这让我有点紧张,因为我是以自己的名义在做。行业里确实有人通过私下渠道给我发消息,说:你在干什么?你在终结自己的职业生涯,这很蠢。而我就是继续做下去了,承担了风险。早期做加密也一样,承担了风险。但当你把名字摆出去、为某些事

1:30:09承担风险时,你也能收获回报,得到好处。问责重要,因为那是你获得杠杆的方式,是你获得可信度的方式,也是你获得股权的方式。在和别人谈判时,你会得到一部分业务。归根结底,如果别人在决定如何补偿你,那个决定会基于你有多可被替换。如果你有很高的问责,那你就更不可被替换,于是他们必须给你股权,也就是一部分上行收益。而股权本身就是个好例子,因为股权也是一种基于风险的工具。股权的意思是,在所有

1:30:47需要保证回报的人被偿付之后,剩下的全归你。所以如果你看一家公司的资本层级,员工最先拿到钱,先付工资,就像法律程序里工资是神圣不可侵犯的。如果你是董事会成员,公司花了太多钱、还欠着工资,政府会追你个人来偿还工资。所以员工得到最大的保障,但作为交换,他们的上行有限。接下来是债务持有者,也许是借钱给公司做运营的银行家,他们需要每月或每年拿到固定利息,

1:31:26但除此之外没有太多上行。他们可能一年赚 5%、10%、15%、20%、25%,但他们的上行就封顶在那里。最后是股权持有者,这些人实际上会拿到大部分上行。所以一旦债务持有者被偿付、工资被付清,剩下的一切都归他们。但如果没有足够的钱付工资和债务持有者,或者刚好只够付工资和债务持有者——大多数企业大多数时候就是这样——股权持有者就什么都拿不到。所以股权持有者承担更大风险,但作为

1:31:59交换,他们得到几乎无限的上行。你在所有工作中也可以这样做。所以本质上,为自己的行为承担问责,就等于在你的全部工作中持有股权。你本质上是在承担更大的下行风险和更大的上行风险。但你要意识到,在现代社会,下行风险并没有那么大。连个人破产在好的生态系统里都能把债务一笔勾销,我最熟悉的是硅谷,但一般来说,只要你诚实、做出了高诚信的努力,人们会原谅失败。所以失败其实没什么好怕的,人们本该承担比现在多得多的问责。

1:32:38问责真的脆弱吗?还是说你想表达的只是:我们天生就不愿公开失败,所以它感觉上很脆弱?我认为它确实可能脆弱。问责的一个例子是,你是一名飞行员,但作为机长,你对整架飞机承担问责。假设飞机出了问题,你不能怪到任何人头上,你不能怪乘务员,你不能怪别人——你是机长,你对这艘船负责。如果你搞砸了,你就把飞机摔了,后果是即时的。在过去,机长被期望与船同沉,

1:33:15如果船在下沉,字面意义上最后一个离开的人是机长。所以是的,我认为问责确实伴随真实风险。但我们现在谈的是商业语境,这里的风险会是你大概是最后一个拿回资本的人,你是最后一个为自己的时间拿到报酬的人。所以你投入的时间、投入公司的资本,这些都在风险中。即使企业失败,你的名字还在上面,但那还不算最糟;最糟的是它变成诚信问题,比如 Bernie Madoff。Madoff 投资那个名字

1:33:47在投资界永远不会再好起来。你可能是 Bernie Madoff 的曾曾曾孙,你也没法进入投资行业,因为你毁了家族名声。所以我认为如今名字带来的问责风险更多关乎诚信,而不是纯粹的经济失败。对我来说,关于问责最大的收获是:你会以与问责完全成比例的方式得到回报。我也认为这就是为什么像 Taleb 这样的人痛斥那些拿回报却不承担问责的 CEO。是的,我是说 Taleb 的《利益攸关》是必读书。如果你想在现代生活中有所作为、理解现代系统如何运作,那本书会排在我的

1:34:30阅读清单很前面。但没错,问责、利益攸关,这些概念紧密相连。我把问责看作声誉上的利益攸关:把你的个人声誉押上去,当作利益攸关。问责是一个简单的概念。问责唯一可能有点反直觉的部分是:我们目前在社会层面被洗脑,不愿承担问责。不是以显眼的方式,但我认为有办法承担问责,让每个团队成员都为自己那一部分承担问责,这样你既能得到运作良好的团队,又能把功劳和损失记在正确的栏目里。那我们为什么不聊聊杠杆?这条推文串里的第一条

1:35:12是 Archimedes 的一句名言:给我一个足够长的杠杆和一个支点,我就能撬动地球。下一条推文是:财富需要杠杆。商业杠杆来自资本、人和复制边际成本为零的产品。杠杆至关重要。我把 Archimedes 那句话塞进去的原因是,通常我不喜欢在推特上放别人的名言,那不会增加任何价值,你可以自己去查那些人的名言。但这句话我必须放进去,因为它太根本了。我很小的时候读到它,它给我留下巨大印象。我们都知道杠杆是什么,

1:35:50当我们用跷跷板或杠杆时,我们理解它在物理上如何运作。但我认为我们的大脑并没有很好地进化到能理解:现代社会中杠杆可以有多大,以及最新的杠杆形式是什么。最古老的杠杆形式是劳动力,就是为你工作的人。所以与其我自己搬石头,我可以让十个人搬石头,然后只要我指引方向、告诉他们石头该去哪儿,就有多得多的石头被搬走,而不是我一个人搬。每个人都理解这一点,因为我们进化出了对劳动力这种杠杆形式的理解。于是社会高估了劳动力这种杠杆,这就是为什么你的父母

1:36:28在你升职、手下有很多人时会很佩服。这就是为什么很多天真的人听说你的公司时,会问“那里有多少人工作”,他们把这当作建立可信度的方式,试图衡量你实际拥有多少杠杆和影响力。或者当某人发起一场运动时,他们会说他们有多少人、军队有多大。我们就是会自动假设人越多越好。但我想说,这是你能使用的最糟糕的杠杆形式。管理别人极其混乱,需要极强的领导力,你离哗变,或者被吃掉、被

1:37:01暴民撕碎,只有一步之遥。这个位置的争夺极其激烈,整个文明都曾因这场斗争被摧毁。比如共产主义、马克思主义,全都是关于资本与劳动的战争——那是资本,那是劳动。所以这是个陷阱。所以你真正要避开以劳动力为基础的杠杆。你要让和你一起工作的人数最少,只要能让你使用其他形式的杠杆就行。但资本要有意思得多。第二种杠杆是资本。这一种在我们身上没那么本能,因为大量资金流动、被储蓄、被投入货币市场,这些是人类在过去几百年到几千年

1:37:41的发明。它们不是伴随我们几十万年进化来的,所以我们对它们理解得差一些,它们大概需要更多智慧才能正确使用,而且我们使用它们的方式一直在变。一百年前的管理技能可能还适用,但一百年前在股市投资的技能,大概在今天不能以同等水平适用。所以资本是一种更难掌握的杠杆形式。在过去的世纪里,人们正是用它变得极其富有,它大概是上个世纪的主导杠杆形式。你可以从谁是最富有的人看出来:银行家、政客,以及印钱的腐败

1:38:16国家,尤其是那些调动大笔资金的人。而如果你看很多大型老公司——科技公司之外——的顶层,CEO 这份工作其实是财务工作,他们实际上是金融资产管理人。有时资产管理人会给自己安一张讨喜的脸,于是你得到 Warren Buffett 那种类型。但内心深处,我想我们都不喜欢资本作为一种杠杆,因为它感觉不公平,因为它是这种无形的东西,可以被积累、跨代传递,然后突然导致一些人拥有巨额资金,而身边没有别人分享。话虽如此,资本是一种

1:38:58强大的杠杆形式,它可以转化成劳动力,可以转化成其他东西。它非常精准、非常分析性。如果你是个出色的投资人,给你十亿美元,你能赚 30% 的回报,而别人只能赚 20%,那所有钱都会给你,你会为此得到非常丰厚的报酬。它规模化得非常好。如果你擅长管理资本,你可以管理越来越多资本,比管理越来越多的人容易得多。所以它是一种好的杠杆形式。但资本的难点在于:你怎么获得它?这就是为什么我先讲特定知识和

1:39:31问责。如果你在某个领域有特定知识,如果你承担问责、在那个领域有好名声,那人们就会把资本作为一种杠杆给你,你可以用它去获得更多资本。但资本也被理解得比较充分,我认为很多对资本主义的抨击来自资本的积累。而最有趣、最重要的杠杆形式,是复制边际成本为零的产品这个想法。这是新的杠杆形式,它只在过去几百年被发明出来,从印刷机开始,被广播媒体加速,现在随着互联网和代码真正爆发。

1:40:07所以现在你可以复制你自己、复制你的努力,不必牵涉其他人,也不需要别人的钱。这个播客就是一种杠杆。很久以前,我得坐在讲演厅里,亲自对你们每个人讲课,也许只能触达几百人,仅此而已。30 年前,我得上电视才走运,而那是别人的杠杆。他们会扭曲信息,会把经济学从中拿走,或者向我收费,他们会把信息搅乱,而我能得到那种杠杆就算走运了。但今天,多亏

1:40:38互联网,我可以买一个便宜的麦克风,接到笔记本电脑或 iPad 上,然后你们就都在这里了。所以最新的杠杆形式,是所有新财富被创造的地方,所有新的亿万富翁上一代的财富是由资本创造的,是 Warren Buffett 那些人;而新一代的财富全都通过代码或媒体创造。Joe Rogan 靠播客一年赚五千万到一亿美元,PewDiePie我不知道他赚多少钱,但他比新闻还大。当然还有 Fortnite 玩家、Jeff Bezos、Mark Zuckerberg、Larry Page、Sergey Brin、Bill Gates、Steve Jobs——那全是基于

1:41:16代码的杠杆。而美妙之处在于,当你把这三种全部结合起来,那才是科技创业公司真正擅长的:你取最少但产出最高的劳动力,也就是工程师、设计师、产品开发者,然后你就用它做营销、广告、规模化;再加上大量代码、媒体、播客和内容,把一切铺出去。这才是神奇的组合,也是为什么你会看到科技创业公司凭空爆发、使用巨大杠杆,然后创造巨大的超额回报。你想聊聊“需要许可”与“无需许可”的杠杆吗?关于新杠杆形式,最值得记住的一点大概是:它们无需许可。

1:42:02你不需要别人的许可才能使用它们或成功。劳动力杠杆,必须有人决定追随你;资本杠杆,必须有人给你钱去投资或变成产品;但写代码、写书、录播客、发推、做 YouTube,这类事情无需许可,你不需要任何人的批准就能做。这就是为什么它们极其平等主义,是杠杆的伟大平衡器。不管人们怎么抨击 Facebook 和YouTube,他们不会停止使用它,因为这种无需许可的杠杆——每个人都能成为广播者——实在太好了。同样,你可以抨击 Apple 的 iPhone 生态有点封闭,但每个人都在

1:42:41为它写应用。所以只要你能为它写应用,你就能靠这个变富或触达用户,何乐而不为?我认为在所有杠杆形式中,现代社会最好的一种——人们会说这有点油滑、有点被用滥了——但这就是为什么我告诉人们去学编程。因为我们有这样一种想法:未来会有这些机器人,它们会做一切事。这也许是真的。但我想说,机器人革命大部分已经发生了。机器人已经在这里了,而且机器人的数量远远多于人类。只是出于散热

1:43:12和效率的考虑,我们把它们塞进数据中心,放进服务器里。它们在计算机内部,在所有电路里,那里面有一个机器人大脑在做所有的工作。所以比如每个伟大的软件开发者,现在都有一支机器人大军为他工作,在他或她睡着的时候、在写完代码之后的夜里,机器还在不停运转。所以机器人大军已经在这里了,机器人革命已经发生了,我们大概走完了一半,我们现在只是加入更多硬件成分。随着我们越来越熟悉、越来越适应自动驾驶汽车、自动驾驶飞机、自动船只,也许还有自动驾驶卡车,以及送货机器人、Boston Dynamics 的机器人等等,

1:43:50但那些已经在为你做网页搜索的机器人,已经在这里了;那些帮你清理视频和音频、把它们传遍全世界的机器人,已经在这里了;那些在回答大量客服问题的机器人——以前你得打电话找人工——已经在这里了。所以一支机器人大军已经在这里,成本非常低,瓶颈只在于想出聪明、有趣的事情让它们去做。本质上,你可以指挥这支机器人大军,只是命令必须用计算机语言、用它们能理解的语言发出。所以这些机器人并不聪明,必须非常精确地告诉

1:44:25它们做什么、怎么做。所以编程是这么强大的超级能力:因为现在你能说机器人大军的语言,你能告诉它们该做什么。而且我觉得到这个时候,人们不仅通过代码指挥服务器里的机器人大军,他们实际上在操纵卡车的移动、操纵别人的行动。你只要在 Amazon 上下单一个包裹,你就在操纵许多人和许多机器人的移动,让他们把包裹送到你手上。现在人们做同样的事来建立企业。所以服务器里有一支机器人大军,同时也有一支真实的机器人和人的大军,通过软件被操控。劳动力和资本则远

1:45:06没那么平等,不仅是在投入上,也是在产出上。假设我需要一些必须由人来提供的东西,比如我想做按摩,或者我需要有人给我做饭,那么这项服务中人的成分越多,它就越不平等。Jeff Bezos 的假期大概比我们大多数人好得多,因为他身边有很多人跑来跑去为他做任何需要的事。但如果你看代码和媒体的产出,Jeff Bezos 并不能看到比我们更好的电影和电视;Jeff Bezos 甚至没有更好的计算体验——Google 不会给他一个高级特别的 Google 账户,

1:45:42让他的搜索更好。这就是代码和媒体产出的本质:同一个产品对所有人都可及,于是它变成正和游戏——如果 Jeff Bezos 消费的同一款产品和另外一千个人一样,那款产品会比 Jeff 独自消费的版本更好。而其他产品就不是这样。比如买一块 Rolex,它已经不再是用来看时间的,而是一种信号商品,完全是为了炫耀“我有一块 Rolex”。那是零和游戏:如果世界上每个人都戴 Rolex,人们就不想再戴 Rolex 了,因为它不再是信号,效应被抵消

1:46:17了。所以富人在消费那种产品时确实有优势,他们会把价格抬到只有他们买得起 Rolex。而像看 Netflix、用 Google、用 Facebook、YouTube,甚至坦白说现代汽车——富人并没有更好的车,他们只是有更奇怪的车。你没法在街上把 Lamborghini 开到任何一个配得上 Lamborghini 的速度,所以它在街上其实是更差的车,到那个地步它只是一种信号商品。你真正该待的甜蜜点,是 Tesla Model 3 那样的车,或者 Corolla——那是辆很棒的车,一辆新

1:46:55Toyota Corolla 是非常好的车。但因为它主流,技术把生产成本摊薄到尽可能多的消费者身上,而最好的产品往往在最中心、在甜蜜点,在中产而不是瞄准上层。所以我认为有一件事我们未必意识到:随着杠杆形式从以人为基础、以劳动力为基础、以资本为基础,转向更多以产品、代码和媒体为基础,我们消费的大部分商品和服务在消费层面正变得越来越平等。连食物都是这样——食物正变得便宜而丰富,至少在第一世界,丰富到

1:47:31对我们有害。Jeff Bezos 也并没有必然吃得更好,他只是吃不同的食物,或者吃那种经过备制、由人端上来的食物,所以那又更像是人的成分……但劳动力粮食生产里的人工要素大幅下降了,资本要素也大幅下降了,所以连粮食生产本身都变得更偏向技术。于是富人和穷人之间的差距在缩小。所以,如果你在乎财富创造中的伦理问题,那最好用代码和媒体作为 leverage 来创造财富,因为这样的产品对所有人都是平等可得的,而不是试图通过劳动力或资本来创造财富,因为

1:48:10我在这里指的是规模经济。技术产品和媒体产品的规模经济太惊人了,所以你总是想用最多人用的那个产品。而最多人用的那个产品,最终会拥有最大的预算——增加一个用户没有边际成本——有了最大的预算,你就能得到最高的质量。所以最好的电视剧其实不会是那些冷门的、只做给少数富人看的东西;它们会是大预算的作品,像《权力的游戏》《绝命毒师》或者《蒙上你的眼》,它们有非常非常庞大的预算,直接用这些预算把质量堆到某个水平。然后

1:48:48富人们为了显得不一样,就得飞去圣丹斯电影节看纪录片,因为你我都不会飞去圣丹斯——因为你知道那是无聊的有钱人用来炫耀的事——我们也不会去看纪录片,因为纪录片其实也没那么好,对吧。再说一次,如果你今天很有钱,对很大一类东西来说,你花钱买的是信号性商品,用来向别人展示你有钱,然后你试图把它们转化成地位,而不是真的为了消费这些商品本身。人和资本作为一种 leverage 形式带有负外部性,而代码和产品则附带正外部性。如果要我总结

1:49:25你的观点:我觉得资本和劳动力也开始变得稍微更不需要许可了,或者至少许可变得分散了,因为互联网。所以现在取代劳动力的是社群,一种分散形式的劳动力。比如 Mark Zuckerberg 通过 Facebook 让十亿人在为他工作;而不用再去找某个富人融资,现在有众筹,你可以为一个慈善项目、一个健康问题或者一门生意筹到成百上千万美元,全都在线上完成。所以资本和劳动力也正在变得不需要许可,你不必非得用老一套方式,到处去求人

1:50:09给你许可,让你用他们的钱或他们的时间。再问一个关于 leverage 的问题:你觉得商业模式的选择,或者产品的选择,是不是也能带来某种 leverage?比如去做一门带网络效应的生意,做一门有品牌效应的生意,或者其他人们可以主动利用、直接给你免费 leverage 的商业模式?是的,有一些非常好的微观经济学概念值得理解,其中一个是规模经济,也就是你生产得越多,单件成本就越低。很多生意都有这个,这是经济学入门课的内容。你应该尽量进入这样一门生意:制造第

1:50:5112 个小部件比制造第 5 个更便宜,制造第 10,000 个又比前面那些便宜得多。这就自动形成了一种进入壁垒,挡住竞争和商品化。所以这个概念很重要。另一个相关的概念:技术产品,尤其是媒体产品,有一个很棒的特性——复制成本为零。所以再复制一份你刚做出来的东西是免费的。所以当有人听这个播客、或者看这个 YouTube 视频时,我不花一分钱。但下一个出现的人——这些零边际成本的东西需要一段时间才能起来,因为每个用户身上你赚得很少,但随

1:51:29着时间推移,它们真的能累积起来。所以 Joe Rogan 做现在这期播客并没有比之前更费力,第一期也不是这样,但到第 1100 期,他靠播客能赚一百万美元,而之前那期第一期他大概是亏钱的。这就是零边际成本的例子。然后最微妙但也最重要的是网络效应这个概念,它来自计算机网络。以太网的创造者 Bob Metcalfe 著名的提出了梅特卡夫定律:一个网络的价值与网络节点数量的平方成正比。所以规模为 10 的网络价值是 100,规模为 100 的网络

1:52:07价值是 10,000。不只是多 10 倍,而是多 100 倍,因为是平方关系,所以差异在于平方。所以你要做有网络效应的生意——前提是你不是第二名。如果你是第一名,在有网络效应的生意里你会赢走一切。比如看 Facebook,对吧,你的朋友和家人的社交网络协议,你的竞争对手是谁?没有。因为他们靠网络效应赢走一切。所以当人们说,好吧,我随时可以离开 Facebook,他们没意识到网络效应会造出自然垄断,这是非常非常强大的东西。硅谷的一个肮脏秘密就是,很多赢家生意都是自然垄断,甚至连共享

1:52:44出行也趋向赢家通吃的系统。只要 Uber 运送的司机和乘客更多,它的经济模型就永远比 Lyft 好。像 Google,那是唯一一个主流搜索引擎——我确实喜欢 DuckDuckGo,你知道因为隐私原因——但他们会一直落后,因为网络效应。Twitter 呢,对吧,做微博客你还能去哪?连 YouTube 也有较弱的网络效应,但仍足够强大,你几乎找不出一个第二名的网站让你日常去看视频。甚至在细节层面,Amazon Prime、便利店、信用卡和信息都会造出强大的网络效应。那么什么是网络效应?我们精确地定义一下:网络

1:53:23效应就是每增加一个用户,都为已有的用户群增加价值,也就是你的用户本身在为已有用户创造价值。我觉得最经典、人人都能理解的例子是语言。假设有一百个人住在一个社区里,说十种不同的语言,每个人只会说其中一种。那你就得一直翻译,痛苦得不行。但如果你们一百个人都说同一种语言,那会带来巨大的价值。这个社区会怎么演变呢:一开始十个人说十种语言,假设多来的一个人学了英语,那么突然之间就有十一个人会英语了。于是下一个

1:54:02来学新语言的人,到某个时点很可能会选英语。假设英语到了二十或二十五个人,那就结束了,它会占据整个语言市场,其他语言都会被竞争掉。这就是为什么长期来看,全世界大概最后都会说英语。中国在互联网上是封闭的,但互联网本身是个巨大的拉平器,想在互联网上交流的人被迫说英语,因为互联网上最大的社群说英语。我一直为那些在外国长大、说外语的同事感到惋惜,因为你接触不到那么多书。很多

1:54:36书根本没有被翻译成其他语言。所以如果你只会说法语,或者只会说德语,或者只会说印地语,那在技术教育上你会处于严重劣势。毫无疑问,如果你去接受技术教育,你就必须学英语,就因为你要读这些书,里面有还没被翻译的数据。所以语言大概是最古老的网络效应例子。货币是另一个例子。我们大概都应该用同一种货币,只不过地理和监管边界造出了这些人为的货币孤岛。但即便这样,世界在多数时候还是倾向于用单一货币作为储备货币,

1:55:12现在就是美元。所以网络效应是个非常强大的概念。你在挑商业模式时,最好挑一个能享受网络效应、低边际成本和规模经济的模式,而这些通常是相辅相成的。任何零边际生产成本的东西显然都有规模经济;而零边际生产成本的东西往往也有网络效应,因为多印一个不额外花钱,于是你可以设计一些小钩子,让用户彼此为对方增加价值。你应该一直思考你的用户、你的客户如何能为彼此增加价值,因为那是最终极的 leverage 形式。

1:55:51你在巴哈马的海滩上,或者晚上睡觉的时候,你的客户都在为彼此增加价值。这条推文串非常抽象,它是刻意设计成广泛适用于各种不同领域、学科、时代和地方的。但有时没有具体例子很难操作,所以我们具体一点。看看房地产这门生意,你可以从最底层开始。假设你是个日工,你过来帮人修房子,有人指挥你,叫你敲开那块石头、锯那块木头、把那东西放到那边去。工地上有各种这类杂活。如果你在做其中

1:56:30某份工作,除非你是木工、电工这类技术工种,否则你其实没有 specific knowledge。而即便是木工、电工也没那么 specific,因为别人可以被培训去做,所以你随时能被替换。所以你一小时拿十五、二十、二十五、五十,运气特别好能拿七十五美元,也就这样了。除了手上的工具,你没有任何 leverage。所以如果你开推土机,那会比纯用手干要好。所以印度的日工挣得少得多,因为他们没有工具带来的 leverage。你也没什么 accountability,你只是施工队里一个没有面孔的齿轮,房子的主人或者

1:57:02买家根本不知道、也不在乎你参与过。往上一层,你可能是个承包商,比如总承包商,有人雇他来修整、翻建自己的房子。这个总承包商承担 accountability,承担责任。所以现在,假设他们接一个活拿到二十五万美元——我用的是湾区价格,就按世界价格说吧——翻修一栋房子收十万美元的活儿,而总承包商最终算下来实际成本是七万美元,那他就把剩下的三万装进兜里。所以他有上行收益,有股权,但同时他也承担 accountability 和风险。所以如果项目

1:57:39超支、出现亏损,他们就得自己吃下亏损。你看,光是 accountability 就给了他们某种额外的潜在收入;而且他们还有劳动力 leverage,因为有一群人在为他们工作。不过大概也就到此为止了。再往上走一层,你可以看房地产开发商。这个人可能原来是个承包商,做过一堆房子,做得非常好,然后决定自己出来做生意。他们四处寻找有潜力的破旧房产,买下来,要么从投资人那里募钱,要么自己出钱,把它们翻新,然后以买入价两倍的价格卖掉

1:58:14——也许他们只多投了 20%,所以利润很健康。这样的开发商承担更多 accountability、更多风险,也有更多 specific knowledge,因为现在你得知道哪些街区值得买,哪些地块真的好、哪些地块很糟,什么决定了一处房产的成败。你得能想象那里最终建成的那栋房子,即便这处房产现在看起来可能很糟。所以这里有更多 specific knowledge,更多 accountability 和风险;而现在你还有资本 leverage,因为你也往项目里投钱。可以想象,你花二十万美元买一块地或者一栋破房子,

1:58:49把它变成百万美元的豪宅,差价全装进自己兜里。再往上一层,可能是个著名建筑师或者开发商——只要你的名字挂在一处房产上,它的价值就上升,因为你做过太多出色的项目。再往上一层,你可能是那种人:决定——好吧,我懂房地产,我现在对房地产的运作规律了解得够多了,与其只是自己建房、翻房、或者改造自己的物业,不如做一个大型开发商,我要建整个社区。另一个人可能会说:我喜欢那种 leverage,但我不想管这么多人,我想更多通过资本来做,所以我要开一家房

1:59:24地产投资信托(REIT)。这需要 specific knowledge,不只是关于投资房地产和建设房地产,还需要关于金融市场、资本市场以及房地产信托如何运作的 specific knowledge。再往上一层可能是这样的人:其实我想在这个市场里施加最大的 leverage 和最多的 specific knowledge。于是这个人会说:好,我懂房地产,从基础的住宅施工到建房卖房,到房地产市场如何运转和繁荣,我都懂;同时我也懂技术生意,所以我懂得如何招开发人员、如何写代码、如何做出那个产品;我还懂得

2:00:03如何从风险投资人那里募资,以及如何给他们回报。这当然不是单个人能全都懂的,你可能要把一个团队聚起来做,每个人有不同技能,但那个组合起来的实体既在技术、又在房地产上有 specific knowledge;它会有巨大的 accountability,因为这家公司的名字会与一个高风险高回报的事业绑定在一起,人们会为此投入自己的一生、承担重大风险;然后它在代码上有 leverage,有很多开发人员;它有资本,投资人投钱,创始人自己也投钱;它还有最高质量的劳动力——

2:00:39你能找到的最好的工程师、设计师和营销人员都在为这家公司工作。最终你可能做出 Trulia、Redfin 或者 Zillow 那样的公司,那么上行空间可能达到数十亿美元,或者数亿美元。所以当你一层层叠加越来越多只能在实战中获得、并非常识的知识,叠加越来越多的accountability 和风险承担,叠加越来越多优秀的人参与,叠加越来越多的资本,叠加越来越多的代码和媒体,你就一直在扩大这个机会的规模,

2:01:11从那个真的趴在地上用手干活的日工,一直到那个创办了房地产科技公司、还把它做上市的人。我们讲过了 specific knowledge,讲过了accountability,讲过了 leverage。Naval 在他那条推文串里讲的最后一个技能是 judgment(判断力)。他说 leverage 是你判断力的力量倍增器。我们现在生活在一个 leverage 几乎无限的时代,所有巨大的财富都是通过 leverage 创造的。所以你的第一份工作是去获得 leverage。你可以通过需要许可的方式获得 leverage:承担风险、让别人为你工作,或者募集资本;你也

2:01:53可以以无需许可的方式获得 leverage:学会写代码,或者成为一个好的沟通者,做播客、做广播、做视频、写作等等。这就是获得 leverage 的方式。但一旦你有了 leverage,你拿它做什么?首先你职业生涯的一部分是用来拼命争取 leverage 的。一旦你有了 leverage,你就想稍微放慢一点,因为你的判断力真的很重要。这就像你原本在摆弄自己的帆船,现在你在驾驶一艘远洋邮轮或者油轮。你承担的风险大得多,但能获得的也多得多,你承载的载荷要大得多。所以在 leverage 无限的时代,判断力成了最重要的技能。Warren Buffett 现在

2:02:29这么富有,就是因为他的判断力。就算你明天把 Warren 所有的钱都拿走,投资人也会从各个角落冒出来,把一千亿美元交到他手上,因为他们知道他的判断力太好了。他们愿意把那一千亿美元的一大部分交给他去投资。所以归根到底,你做的其他一切,其实都是在为运用你的判断力做准备。人们猛烈抨击的一件事就是 CEO 的薪酬,当然确实存在裙带资本主义,这些 CEO 控制董事会,董事会给他们太多钱。但有些 CEO 绝对是物有所值的,因为他们的判断力更好。如果你在驾驶一艘大船,

2:03:03如果你在驾驶 Google 或 Apple,而你的判断力比下一个人好 10% 或 20%,社会真的会多付你几亿美元,因为你在驾驶一艘千亿美元的大船。如果你在航向上比另一个人多对 10% 或 20% 的时间,你所管理的这数千亿美元产生的复利结果会大到让你的 CEO 薪酬显得微不足道。所以已被证明的判断力、围绕它的可信度——判断力如此关键。Warren Buffett 在这里胜出,因为他有巨大的可信度:他极度 accountable,他在公众视野里一次又一次地判断正确,他建立了极高诚信的声誉,所以你可以信任他。

2:03:45像这样的人,人们会因为他的判断力而把无限的 leverage 押在他身上。没人问他工作有多努力,没人问他几点起床、几点睡觉。就像对 Warren 说的:你就干你的吧。所以,尤其是已被证明的判断力,加上高度的 accountability 和清晰的过往记录,至关重要。我们来定义一下判断力。我会把它定义为:知道你的决策的长期影响,或者能够预测你的决策的长期影响。有意思的是,我对智慧的定义是:知道你的行为的长期后果。两者差别并不大。智慧只是个人领域里的判断力;把智慧应用到外部问题上,我认为就是判断力。所以它们高度相关。但没错,就是知道长期的

2:04:30后果,然后做出某种正确的决定去利用它。判断力很难建立,这里是智力和经验同时起作用的地方。象牙塔里的知识分子有很多问题,而 Nassim Taleb 猛烈抨击他们的一个原因,就是他们没有 skin in the game(不承担后果),他们没有真实世界的经验。所以他们只运用纯粹的智力和理解,没有任何经验,这往往比无用还糟,因为智力给了你自信,你也获得了一些可信度,但因为你没有 skin in the game,没有真实经验,没有真正的 accountability,你就

2:05:05只是在扔飞镖。真实世界永远远比我们能理性化的复杂得多,尤其是所有有趣的、快速变化的边缘领域和问题,没有经验你根本到不了那里。所以如果你聪明、迭代快,甚至不需要在一件事上投入一万小时,而是在一件事上尝试一万次。如果你聪明、能大量快速迭代,并尽量把情绪排除在外——判断力最好的人其实是最不情绪化的一批人。很多最好的投资人在这一点上几乎被认为是机器人。但我一点也不意外,即便最好的创业者,也常常给人不带感情的印象。有一种

2:05:45“激情创业者”的典型形象。是的,他们必须在乎自己在做的事,但他们也必须非常清楚地看到实际正在发生什么。而妨碍你看到实际正在发生的事的,就是你的情绪——我们的情绪一直在蒙蔽我们的判断力。无论是投资、经营公司、做产品还是做创业者,情绪真的会挡路。情绪阻止你看到实际正在发生的事,直到你再也无法抗拒事情的真相,直到它变得太突然,然后你被迫承受痛苦——那其实就是你拼凑起来的那个情绪幻想破灭的过程。为了把其中一些概念串起来,我想说:首先,你要对你的判断力负责;判断力

2:06:26是智慧的运用,来自经验,而经验可以通过短周期迭代来加速。这就是为什么很多顶尖投资人、很多价值投资人——如果你读 Jeremy Grantham,或者读 WarrenBuffett,或者研究 Michael Burry——这些人听起来像哲学家,或者他们本身就是哲学家;他们读大量历史书或科学书。他们在干什么?他们不该读投资书吗?不,投资书是学习投资最糟糕的地方,因为投资是一种真实世界的活动,高度多变量,所有优势都在被竞争消磨掉,永远处在最前沿。你真正需要的只是非常非常广博的

2:07:08判断力和思考能力,而最好的方式是什么都学,包括大量哲学。哲学还能让你更坚忍、更少情绪化,于是你做出更好的决策,拥有更好的判断力。一个简单的观察是:我在 Twitter 上看到——你继续——Twitter 上一半的人任何时候都在对什么事愤怒。你可以翻看某个人的 Twitter 时间线,至少能大致感受到一直待在他脑子里是什么感觉。我向你保证,一个人越爱愤怒,他的判断力就越差。如果某人不停地发政治愤怒推文,看起来像个到处吵架的愤怒之人,你不会想把

2:07:44你的车钥匙交给这种人,更别说把公司的钥匙交给他。好,我们讲了致富所需的技能:specific knowledge、accountability、leverage、判断力,以及终身学习。我们再聊聊努力工作以及重视自己时间的重要性。没有人会比你自己更看重你,所以你必须给自己设定一个非常高的小时费率,并且坚持它。所以即便从年轻时起,我就认定我自己的价值远高于市场认为的价值,然后我开始那样对待自己。所以永远要把时间计入每一个决策:这要花多少时间?

2:08:26哦,穿过整个城去拿这个东西要花我一小时。我给自己估值每小时一百美元,那就是从口袋里扔掉一百块。我会去做吗?你在 Amazon 买了东西,他们搞砸了,你得退回去。退货值得你花这时间吗?值得这份心力折腾吗?记住,你的工作时间更少,你精神高产出的时间更少。你是想把这些时间用来跑腿、解决小问题,还是想把它们留给大事?所有伟大的科学家都不擅长打理家庭生活,没有一个人有干净整齐的房间,或者你知道,

2:08:58准时出席所有社交活动,或者寄出感谢卡。你可以随心所欲地度过一生,但如果你想致富,它必须成为你第一位、压倒一切的渴望,这意味着它必须排在一切之前。这意味着你不能小气抠门。这就是人们理解的那套:你可以靠精打细算维持基本生计,把开支压低,也许早点退休、少花钱,那完全合理。但我们这里谈的是财富创造,如果你要做这件事,那它就必须是你第一位、压倒一切的优先事项。所以快进到你已经富有的自己,然后选一个中间的小时费率。对我来说,信不信由你,

2:09:32回到你还能雇得起我的时候——现在显然不行了——但回到你还能雇我的时候,这在十年前甚至二十年前、在我还没有什么真正的钱的时候就是如此:我给自己定的时薪,我一遍又一遍对自己说的,是今天每小时五千美元。现在回头看,其实大约是每小时一千美元。当然我还是会干蠢事,比如跟电工争论,或者去退那个坏掉的音箱——但我本不该这样。我在这类事上比我任何朋友都少做得多。我会很戏剧化地把东西扔进垃圾堆,或者捐给救世军,而不是去退货,

2:10:03或者把东西直接给人,而不是去修。我会跟女朋友争论——甚至今天跟妻子也是——我说我不干这个,这不是我要解决的问题。我到现在还会跟我妈争这个:她递给我一堆小事让我做,我就是不做,我宁愿给你雇个助理。这在我没钱的时候就已经如此了。另一种思考方式是:如果某件事可以外包,或者不做某件事的代价低于你的时薪,那就外包,或者干脆不做。所以如果你能雇人来做,花费低于你的时薪,那就雇人。这甚至包括做饭这类事。

2:10:31你可能想吃自己做的健康家常菜,但如果能外包,那就外包。我知道有人会说:那生活的乐趣呢?那按自己的方式做到位呢?当然,你可以那样做,但你不会富有,因为你现在把别的东西放在了优先位置。Paul Graham 说得挺好,对 Y Combinator 的创业公司,他说你应该专注于你的产品、做出 product market fit,还要锻炼、吃得健康,大概就这些。在执行这个使命期间,你大概就只有这些时间。所以给自己设定一个非常高的、带理想色彩的小时费率,并坚持它,它应该

2:11:00看起来、感觉起来高得离谱。如果没这种感觉,那就是还不够高。不管你选了什么,我给你的建议是:再往上调。就像我说的,我自己在有钱之前,很长一段时间用的是五千美元一小时。如果你把它外推成年薪,那是每年好几百万美元。讽刺的是,我其实觉得自己超过了这个数,但回头看,因为我并不是最勤奋的人——我其实有点懒,所以我是靠一阵阵的能量爆发来工作的,那种对某件事特别有动力的状态。所以如果我真的去算我每实际投入一小时赚了多少,大概要

2:11:30高不少。我们聊聊努力工作。Twitter 上经常有一场争论:到底该不该拼命工作。比如 David Heinemeier Hansson 在那儿说这像是在奴役别人,而 Keith Rabois总在那儿说:不,所有伟大的创始人都拼到手指磨破。他们其实是在各说各话。首先,他们谈的是两件不同的事。David 谈的是生活方式型生意里的员工,那没问题——如果你做那种生意,你人生中第一位的就不是致富,你有一份工作,你还有家庭,你还有你的生活。但 Keith 谈的是创业界的奥运会,他谈的是

2:12:01那个冲金牌、想打造一家数十亿美元上市公司的人。那个人必须每一件事都做对:必须有出色的判断力,必须选对要做的事,必须招到对的团队,而且必须玩命工作,因为他们基本上是在进行一场竞争性的冲刺。所以如果致富是你的目标,你就必须尽力去拼。但努力工作绝对不能替代“和谁一起工作”以及“做什么”。你做什么,大概是最重要的事。要找到 product market founder fit(产品、市场、创始人三者契合)。扩展 Marc Andreessen 的定义,他提出的是 product market fit,而我会

2:12:36加上 founder:product market founder fit,也就是你个人与那门生意有多契合。这三者的结合应该是你压倒一切的目标。如果你选对了领域,你能省下大量时间;选对一起工作的人是第二重要的一块;第三才是你工作有多努力。它们就像凳子的三条腿,任何一条偷工减料,整张凳子都会倒。所以并不是你能轻易地只取其一。所以当你创业、甚至构建职业生涯时,操作顺序是:第一,想清楚我应该做什么——

2:13:10什么是那个正在兴起的市场里有需求、我能做出让自己兴奋的产品、并且我有 specific knowledge、真的非常投入的事。第二,让自己身边围绕着尽可能最好的人。不管你的标准多高,都要再提高,因为和你共事的人永远不够优秀。如果外面有更优秀的人可以合作,你就该去和他们合作。很多人来问我该加入硅谷的哪家创业公司,我给他们的建议基本上是:选那个未来能给你最好“校友网络”的。看看 PayPal 黑帮,他们

2:13:40和一群天才共事,所以他们都富了。所以就按你能找到的智力、能量和正直程度最高的人来选。最后,一旦你选对了要做的事、选对了共事的人,那就尽全力去工作。神话在这里就有点离谱了——有人会一周工作 80、100、120 小时,其中很多只是地位信号,是在炫耀。没有人真的能一周持续 80、100、120 小时还能保持高产出和头脑清晰——你的大脑会崩溃,你就是不会有好点子。所以人们真正最高效的工作方式,尤其在知识工作里,是尽全力冲刺

2:14:18——在工作某件事、有灵感、有热情的时候——然后休息,长时间休息。这更像狮子捕猎,而不像跑马拉松。所以你冲刺,然后休息,重新评估,然后再试一次。最终你做出来的,是一场由冲刺组成的马拉松。Nivi 刚在旁边跟我提了一句:灵感是易腐的,这是个非常好的观点。当你有灵感时,就当场去做。我写推文串时经常这样:我其实想出过一大堆额外的推文,最终还是决定只保留已经发出去的那些。

2:14:48但有时候我就是犹豫了一下,或者停了一下,然后它就死了。我学到的是:如果我有灵感写一篇博客或者发一条推文串,我大概应该立刻去做,否则它就不会面世,我也不会再回来写它。所以灵感是美好而强大的东西,当你有它时就抓住它。人们会谈到“不耐烦”:你怎么知道什么时候该不耐烦、什么时候该有耐心?我对此有一条随口而出的推文:对行动要不耐烦,对结果要有耐心。我觉得这其实是很好的人生哲学。任何你必须做的事,就赶紧去做,为什么要等?你不会变得

2:15:21更年轻,你的生命正在流逝。你不想把生命花在排队上,不想花在来回奔波上,不想花在那些你知道最终不属于你使命的事情上。而当你做这些事时,你要尽可能快,同时全心投入把它们做好。但之后你就必须放下对结果的执着,你必须对结果有耐心,因为你要面对复杂的系统、要和很多人打交道。市场采纳产品需要很长时间,人们彼此磨合到舒服需要时间,伟大的产品也需要时间

2:15:51才浮现出来,你要一遍遍打磨、打磨、再打磨。所以:对行动不耐烦,对结果有耐心。还有 Nivi 说的,灵感是易腐的,所以当你有灵感时,当场就行动。如果我有一个问题——在我某家公司里发现了某个必须解决的问题——我睡不着,直到至少解决方案开始推进。这算是我的个人缺陷。如果我是一家公司的董事,我会打电话给 CEO;如果我经营这家公司,我会打电话给我的下属;如果这是我的责任,我会当场就上手解决。如果问题发生的那一刻我没有解决它,或者没有从那一刻起开始着手解决,

2:16:25我就没有安宁,没有休息,没有快乐,直到那个问题被解决。所以尽可能快地解决它。我真的会睡不着,直到它被解决。也许这只是个人特质,但在生意上它效果很好。我们是用千刀万剐的方式浪费自己的时间。所以另一条推文是:你应该忙到没时间喝咖啡,同时还要保持一份清爽的日程表。认识我的人都知道我出了名的同时做两件事:一是有一份非常干净的日程表,上面几乎没有会议,有些跟我见面的人看到我的日程表几乎要哭出来;与此同时,我一直很忙,

2:16:59我总是在做点什么,通常是所谓“与工作相关”的,但其实是那个时刻需要做、影响最大、而我又最感兴趣、最有灵感的事。而做到这一点的唯一方式,就是不断地、无情地拒绝会议。人们想喝咖啡、建立关系,这在你职业生涯早期还在探索的时候没问题。但到了职业生涯后期,我们是在做深度经营,有更多事情涌向你而你没有那么多时间。你必须无情地把会议从生活里砍掉。如果某人想开会,看看能不能改成一个电话;如果他们想通电话,看看

2:17:32能不能改成一封邮件;如果他们要发邮件,看看能不能改成一条短信;如果他们是发短信,你大概应该忽略大部分短信,除非是真正的紧急情况。所以人必须极其无情地躲避会议。当你确实要开会时,开走路会议、开站立会议,保持简短、保持可执行、保持小规模。任何八个人坐在会议桌旁的会议,在那里面什么也完不成,你实际上是在一小时一小时地死去。说到喝咖啡,我想起一句老话,我记得是 Steve Jobs 说的。当时有人问他:嘿,为什么 Apple 不参加展会,或者为什么

2:18:07你不来我的大会?他的回答是:那样的话,我们就不会在这里工作了。是啊,我以前很难拒绝别人的会议邀约,但现在我直接跟他们说,我就说:你看,我不做没有实质交易的会议,我不做没有严格议程的会议,除非绝对必要,否则我不开会。Naval 以前就是这么做的,当有人问能不能见面时,他会发邮件,比如喝个咖啡认识一下,他会说:除非生死攸关的紧急情况,我们不开会。然后对方就必须回答:是的,这是生死攸关的。否则就没有会议。当你有重要的事、

2:18:40有价值的事,其他忙碌而有趣的人就会见你。你的“名片”必须是:嘿,这是我做成的事,这是我能给你看的东西,我们见一面吧,我会尊重你的时间,如果这对你有用的话。我发现确实有非常忙碌、非常重要的人愿意跟你见面,但你必须带着像样的“名片”来。所有那些在 Twitter 上@人、或者给名人富人发邮件说“嘿,如果我能跟你见上一面”、而且说得很含糊的人,他们的人生不会有什么进展。你必须建立起可信度。比如一个科技、风投行业的投资人看一家创业公司时,

2:19:16他们想看到的第一样东西,就是产品进展的证据。他们甚至不想只看一份幻灯片,他们想看产品进展,因为产品进展就是创业者的简历,是一份不可动摇、无法造假的简历。所以你必须去做事。用加密货币的比喻来说,你必须有 proof of work(工作量证明)。如果你有 proof of work,你真的有东西,那你就不该犹豫把它整理进一封邮件发出去。但即便那样,当你在请求一次会议时,也要非常具体、可操作。不过我也想说另一面:即便你自己还没有

2:19:48成功,如果你以为自己靠出去社交、参加一堆会议就能成功,那你大概想错了。是的,社交在职业早期可能重要;是的,会议上可能碰巧有奇遇;但概率相当低。正如我们前面花时间讨论过的,当你只是见人、希望撞上那个幸运机会时,你依赖的是第一种运气,即盲目的运气,以及第二种运气,即拼搏的运气。但你没有得到的是第三种和第四种运气——那才是更好的运气:你花时间建立声誉、深耕某件事、形成独特的视角,并且能够发现

2:20:25别人发现不了的机会。一颗忙碌的心、一个忙乱的头脑,会毁掉你在这个世界上做成伟大事情的能力。如果你想做成伟大的事,无论你是音乐家、创业者,还是投资人,你都需要自由的时间,也需要自由的头脑。我们刚谈完努力工作和重视时间的重要性。接下来有几条关于“为长期而工作”的推文。第一条推文是:成为你所在领域的世界第一。不断重新定义你在做的事,直到这一点成真。如果你真的想在这个世界上赚到钱,你就想成为你所做之事的第

2:21:05一名。它可以是小众的——这就是重点。它甚至可以就是你仅仅因为“做你自己”而获得报酬。你知道,现在世界上一些更成功的人就是这样。Oprah 拿钱就是因为她是 Oprah,Joe Rogan 拿钱就是因为他是 Joe Rogan,他们都对自己真实。所以这条推文同时想说的是:你想成为第一名,但你要不断改变你做的事,直到你成为第一名。你不能随便挑一件事,不能说我就要做世界上跑得最快的人——然后你得去打败 Usain Bolt,那问题太难了。但你可以

2:21:37做的是:不断改变你的目标,直到它落在你的 specific knowledge、你的技能组合、你的位置、你的能力、你的所在地、你的兴趣之上,然后收敛到让你成为第一名。所以当你在寻找该做什么时,你其实有两个不同焦点必须始终记在心里:一个是我要成为我所做之事中最好的;第二个是我做的事是灵活的,好让我能成为其中最好的,直到你到达一个舒服的位置,就像:对,这就是我能做到出色、同时又忠于我是谁的事。而这不会是

2:22:13一夜之间的发现,它会是一段漫长的旅程。但至少你知道该怎么思考它。对一家公司来说,最重要的是找到 product market fit;我会说,对一个创业者来说,最重要的是找到 founder product market fit,也就是你天生就倾向于做出那个有市场的正确产品。这是一个三焦点问题,你必须让这三者同时成立。如果你想在人生中成功,你就必须习惯处理多变量问题、多个目标函数。而这正是那种你必须同时处理至少两三个变量的情况。这让我想起

2:22:46你那条关于“通过真实来逃离竞争”的推文。听起来其中一部分是对“我是谁”的探索。它既是探索,也是辨认,因为有时候我们的自我在探索时,我们想成为自己并不是的那种人,而我们的朋友和家人更擅长告诉我们真实的自己是谁;或者回头看我们做过的事,那才是“我们是谁”更好的指标。Peter Thiel 经常讲竞争是无关紧要的,它是反效果的。我们是高度模仿性的生物,我们复制周围每个人在做的事,我们从他们那里复制欲望。如果我周围每个人都是伟大的艺术家,我就想当艺术家;如果我周围每个人都是伟大的商人,

2:23:23我就想当商人;如果我周围每个人都是社会活动家,我就想当社会活动家——我的自尊就来自那里。当你被卷入这些地位游戏时要小心一点,你最终会为不值得竞争的东西去竞争。Peter Thiel 讲过,他本来要去当法官助理,因为他在法学院,他周围每个人都想当最高法院大法官或者某位名法官的助理。他被拒绝了,这才促使他进入商界。所以这帮他从一个较小的游戏跳到一个更大的游戏。所以有时候你只是被困在

2:23:56错误的游戏里,因为你在竞争。逃离竞争、远离竞争这个幽灵的最好方式——竞争不仅压力大、伤神,还常常把你逼向错误的答案——逃离竞争的方式就是对自己真实。如果你从根本上在打造和营销的,只是“你是谁”的延伸,那就没人在这一点上能跟你竞争。谁会去跟 Joe Rogan 或 Scott Adams 竞争?不可能。会有别人来写出更好的《呆伯特》吗?不会。会有人去跟 Bill Watterson 竞争、创作出更好的《卡尔文与霍布斯》吗?不会。做真实的自己——这在艺术里最容易看出来,艺术家

2:24:32按定义天生就是真实的。但创业者也是真实的。谁能成为 Elon Musk?谁能成为 Jack Dorsey?这些人是真实的,他们创造的企业和产品忠于他们自己的欲望和手段。如果别人出现、也开始发射火箭,我觉得一点都不会影响 Elon。他仍然要去火星,因为那是他自己设定的目标——你知道,虽然听起来疯狂——他会实现它。所以真实天然让你远离竞争。但这不意味着你要真实到没有 product market fit 的地步。也许结果是你是在独轮车上最好的杂耍者,但也许这个

2:25:10市场并不大,即便有 YouTube 视频也一样。所以你得想办法调整,直到找到 product market fit。但至少要倾向于真实、倾向于远离竞争——竞争会自动导向模仿,而且常常导向完全玩错游戏。尤其在创业里,大众从来不会对。如果你看到很多人在 Twitter 上说某个市场多值得进入,或者你看到记者说某家公司很糟糕,他们什么都不懂。如果大众知道如何打造伟大的东西、创造巨大的财富,那早就成了,我们早就富了。所以某种意义上,当你看到大量竞争时,有时候它是在告诉你:

2:25:51大众已经在这里了,所以这里已经被竞争过度,没什么机会;或者这本来就是个错误的趋势。另一方面,如果它完全空无一人,如果整个市场都是空的、没人在那里,那也可能是一个警示信号:你太偏向真实,而在 founder product market fit 里 product market fit 那一部分做得不够。所以有一个平衡,你必须找到它。但一般来说,大多数人会犯的错误是太关注竞争、太像竞争对手、不够真实。而伟大的创始人往往是真实的“反偶像者”。我不想再提 Scott Adams 的技能堆栈了,

2:26:30但还是得提一下:你觉得通往真实的一条路,不一定是要加一些你认为可能重要的随机技能,而是真正找出五六个你本来就在真实地做的技能,然后把它们叠在一起,甚至不需要带什么目的性?如果你在表达你自己,你本来就会表达出这五六个小技能。那其实正是人生长期会把你带到的地方。如果你在所做的事上出色、成功,你会发现不管你原来的爱好是什么,你几乎都在把它们当成职业来做。就像 Robert Frost 说的,把你的职业和

2:27:12副业结合起来——你热爱做的事和你实际做的事。所以我觉得你无论如何都会走到那里。关于技能堆栈你说得对,每个人都有多种技能,我们并不都是一维生物,尽管为了求职,我们不得不在网上档案里那样呈现自己。你遇到一个人,他说我是银行家、我是调酒师、我是理发师,诸如此类,都是 B 开头。但人是多变量的,他们有很多技能。一个银行家可能擅长融资,另一个可能擅长销售,第三个可能就擅长宏观经济趋势、对市场有感觉,另一个可能非常擅长

2:27:43挑选个股,你知道,还有一个可能只是擅长维护关系,而不是开发新关系。所以每个人都会有自己各种细分定位,而且你会有多个细分定位,不会只有一个。所以随着时间,你会发现,在职业发展过程中,一方面你会自然被自己擅长的事吸引——按定义,那几乎就是你享受做的事,否则你不会擅长,不会投入那些时间;另一方面别人也会把你推向自己擅长的事,因为你聪明的老板、聪明的同事、聪明的投资人会意识到:好,你在这件事上是世界级的,那件事我们招别人来做就行。

2:28:16所以理想情况下,你最终要专精于“做你自己”。我觉得当你真实的时候,你其实不太在乎竞争。是的,它会惹你生气,会激起一些恐惧和嫉妒,以及所有随之而来的情绪,但你其实也不太在意,因为你更朝向目标和使命。最坏的情况,你从他们那里得到一些点子;而且通常有办法与竞争对手以积极的方式合作,最终还会为你扩大市场规模。是的,有时候这取决于生意的性质。硅谷科技行业的企业往往是赢家通吃——至少那些好的企业如此。所以当

2:28:57你看到竞争时,可能会暴怒,因为它确实危及你建立的一切。而如果我是开餐厅的,在另一个城市开了一家更有趣的同类型餐厅,那太好了,我直接从他们那里学有效的做法,丢掉那些我看出他们已经验证无效的做法。所以这在一定程度上取决于生意的性质。话虽如此,即便是那些看起来像是在直接竞争、其实并不是的生意,最终可能变成相邻的或略有不同的生意。你离一门完全不同的生意只有一步之遥,而有时候你需要迈出那一步,但如果你

2:29:32忙着争夺一个安慰奖,你就迈不出那一步。玩愚蠢的游戏,就会赢得愚蠢的奖品。现在这并不明显,因为竞争蒙住了你的眼,但三年后就会很明显了。举个简单的例子。我最早创业时,其中一家公司叫 Epinions,是一个独立于 Amazon 的在线产品评测网站,评测市面上的各种产品。那个领域后来变成了TripAdvisor 和 Yelp,那才是我们应该走的方向。我们应该做更多本地评测,因为评测一个稀缺物品的价值更高——比如你本地的一家餐厅,就比评测像

2:30:07相机这种在 Amazon 上会有一千条评测的东西更有价值。但在我们走到那一步之前,我们卷进了整个比价购物的大战,最后和 DealTime 合并,跟 mySimon、BizRate(后来变成 Shopzilla)、PriceGrabber、NextTag 以及一大票比价引擎激烈竞争。我们全都陷在彼此的白热化竞争里,结果整个领域归零了,因为事实证明 Amazon把所有东西都零售完了,比价根本没必要,大家直接去 Amazon。但我们拿到了安慰奖,因为我们陷在跟同行的竞争里,而真正应该做的是看

2:30:40消费者真正想要什么,对自己真实——那就是评测,而不是比价——并且越来越深入那些越来越冷门、更需要被评测的商品,那些地方顾客掌握的数据越来越少、却更急切地需要评测。所以如果我们坚持对自己真实,我们会做得更好。我们还在谈“为长期而工作”。这个话题的下一条推文是:把 specific knowledge 加上 leverage 去运用,最终你会得到你应得的。我还要加上:运用判断力、运用 accountability、运用阅读这项技能。这一条只是用一句顺口的话说明:这需要时间。即便你已经把所有这些拼图都放到位置,仍然有

2:31:22一段不确定长度的时间需要你投入。如果你在数日子,那在它真正到来之前你就会耗尽耐心。所以你只需要确保给这些事情足够的时间。人生很长。Charlie Munger 对此有句话。有人问他挣钱的事,他重新解读了那个问题,他说:提问者真正问的是——我怎么才能像你一样富有,但更快,赶在我变成一个真正的老头子之前?每个人都想立刻得到,但世界是个有效率的市场,“立刻”行不通。你确实必须投入时间,你必须投入那些小时。所以我觉得你

2:31:54只需要把自己放到那个位置上:带着 specific knowledge、带着 accountability、带着 leverage、带着你那份真实的技能组合,成为你所做之事的世界第一。然后你必须享受它,一直做下去、做下去、做下去,不要记账,不要计数,因为如果你数,你就会耗尽时间。回看我自己的职业生涯,那些人——二十年前我就认定他们聪明又勤奋、但没再多想的那些人——现在几乎毫无例外都成功了。在足够长的时间尺度上,你确实会得到回报,但很容易要 10 年或者

2:32:2820 年,有时候是 5 年。如果是 5 年或 3 年,而你朋友已经到那儿了,那能把你逼疯。但那些是例外,每一个赢家背后都有多个失败者。创业中很重要的一点是:你只需要对一次。你会得到很多很多次射门机会——每三到五年可以射一次门,最慢也许每十年一次,最快每年一次,取决于你在创业上如何迭代。但你真的只需要对一次。我的小方程式是:你最终的结果,大致等于你 specific knowledge 的独特程度,乘以你能对那份知识施加多少 leverage,

2:33:07乘以你的判断正确的频率,乘以你对结果有多独特地 accountable,乘以社会对你所做的事的估值,然后你把这一切用“你能坚持做多久”和“你能通过阅读和学习持续改进它多久”来复利。这其实是总结它的一个非常好的方式,甚至值得试着把这个方程式画出来。话虽如此,人们会试图把它当数学来用,而它其实是哲学。所以我见过这种情况:我说一件事,然后又说另一件事,如果你把它当成数学方程式,它们看起来是矛盾的,但它们显然是在不同语境下。然后人们会说:你说

2:33:46“欲望即痛苦”,那是佛教的说法;然后你又说“一切伟大都伴随痛苦”,那是不是意味着一切伟大都来自欲望?这不是数学,各位。你不能随便把变量搬来搬去,得出绝对的逻辑结论。你必须知道什么时候该应用什么。所以我觉得理解这一点非常有用,但同时也不能对它过度分析。物理学家会把这种情况叫做“虚假精确”:你拿两个编造的估算值相乘,得到四位精度的结果——那些小数点其实不算数。你并没有那样的数据,你没有那样的知识。在一个模型里,估算变量越多,误差

2:34:24就越大。所以给你的决策过程不断加复杂度,反而会让你得到更差的答案。你不如只挑一两个最大的因素。比如:根据观察,我真正擅长什么?根据我信任的人的看法,市场看重什么?——光这两个变量大概就足够了。因为如果你擅长它,你就会坚持下去;如果你擅长它,你就会发展出判断力;如果你擅长它、又喜欢做它,最终人们会给你资源,你也不会害怕承担 accountability。于是其他所有拼图都会各就各位,product market fit 是必然的。

2:35:00如果你做的事是你热爱的,而且市场也想要它。说到那个“五年内致富”的人,你有一条被剪掉的推文是:远离那些快速致富的人,他们只是在给你念他们的中奖彩票号码。这其实对建议来说普遍成立,这又回到了 Scott Adams 说的“要系统,不要目标”。如果你问某个具体的人什么对他有效,往往就像他在朗读那套恰好对他有效的东西,而那可能并不适用于你。他们只是在给你念中奖彩票号码。这话有点刻薄,从他们身上确实能学到东西,但你不能直接

2:35:40把他们的具体处境套到你身上。我认识的最好的创始人,他们会听所有人、读所有人的东西,然后就无视所有人,自己下判断。他们有一套自己内在的模型,来决定如何把事情应用到自己的处境上,而且毫不犹豫地丢弃信息。如果你调查足够多的人,所有建议会相互抵消归零。所以你确实必须有自己的观点。当有什么东西送到你面前时,你必须很快判断:在那个人的语境之外,它成立吗?在我的语境里成立吗?然后我想不想用它?你必须拒绝大部分建议,但你必须

2:36:19听、读足够多的建议,才知道该拒绝什么、接受什么。即便在这个播客里,你也应该审视一切。如果某个东西对你来说感觉不真实,就放下它、搁置它。如果太多东西看起来不真实,就删掉这个播客。我觉得接受建议最危险的地方在于:给你建议的人不会在你身边,告诉你它什么时候不再适用了。不过我对建议的用途看法跟大多数人有点不同。我只是把它看作帮我积累一些轶事和箴言,之后当我有了自己的直接经验时,可以回想起来说:啊,原来那个人是这个意思。

2:36:58我 90% 的推文其实都是我为我自己刻的箴言,它们是一些小小的心理挂钩,提醒我当我再次陷入那种情境时——比如:哦,我就是那个发推说“如果你无法想象自己和某人共事一辈子,那就一天都不要跟他共事”的人。所以一旦我知道这个人不会是我十年后还会共事的人,我就得开始把自己抽离出来,从那段关系里抽离,或者干脆不再投入那么多精力。所以我把自己的推文和其他人的推文当作压缩我自己所学的方式,好让它们能被回想起来,因为你知道,大脑空间是

2:37:32有限的,神经元也有限。所以你几乎可以把它们看作指针、地址、记忆术,帮你记住那些根深蒂固的原则——前提是你有底层经验去支撑它。如果你没有底层经验,那它读起来就只是一堆语录。就像:挺酷的,有那么一刻很励志,也许你还能做张不错的海报,然后你就忘了它,继续往前走。所以所有这些,其实都只是让你回想起自己知识的紧凑方式。关于“为长期而工作”的最后一条推文是:当你终于富有时,你会意识到它并不是你最初追寻的东西。但那是另一个话题了,那

2:38:10本身就是一个要讲好几小时的话题。Nivi 觉得这是结束整件事的非常聪明的方式,因为它卸下了一整类人的防备——他们会说:你知道,到某个时候我确实会致富,因为有很多人就是喜欢用地位信号、道德信号来反对财富创造或者赚钱这个想法。所以这是卸下他们所有人防备的好办法。但它同时也是真的:你真正想要的东西——是的,钱会解决你所有的钱的问题,但它不能把你带到所有地方。当你赚到一大笔钱后,你意识到的第一件事是:你还是同一个人。如果你快乐,你就快乐;

2:38:43如果你不快乐;如果你平静、充实、安宁,你还是那个人。我认识很多非常富有的人,身材极度走样;我认识很多富人,家庭生活非常糟糕;我认识很多富人,内里一团乱。所以我要倚重我发过的另一条推文。回想起来,我觉得那是我最喜欢的一条推文。它一开始并不是最有洞见的,也远不是最有用的,甚至不是我想得最多的那条,但当我看着它时,其中就有那么一种确凿的真理,让人产生共鸣。那就是:一颗

2:39:17平静的心、健康的身体、充满爱的家——这些东西买不到,必须靠自己去挣得。即便你有世界上所有的钱,你也无法拥有这三样东西。Jeff Bezos 还是必须锻炼身体;他还是必须在婚姻里、或者他下一段关系里下功夫;他的内在心理状态仍然很大程度上不受外部事件控制,而是取决于他内心有多平静、多安宁。所以我觉得那三样东西——你的健康、你的心理健康、你的亲密关系——是必须去培育的,它们大概能给你带来比任何数量的金钱都多得多的平静和幸福。这就是

2:39:52我的意思。至于怎么达到那里,那其实是我还需要发布的一条推文串。我一直在写,大概有一百条草稿,只是在这个话题上说任何话都很难,不招来五十个方向的攻击,尤其是现在在 Twitter 上。所以一直犹豫要不要发,因为我想把它瞄准一类非常特定的人。有一群人,他们不相信修炼内在状态有用,他们太专注外部,那也没问题,没什么不对,他们就该那样做——“如何致富”这条推文串正是给他们的。还有一群人

2:40:24相信唯一值得修炼的是彻底解脱,比如你成为佛陀,他们会攻击中间任何东西都是没用的。那也没关系,大多数人还没到那一步。所以我想做的是写一条推文串,给那些想要内心更平静的普通人一些非常实用的建议,就是一组理解、领悟、真理——如果你能正确地吸收它们,而且再说一次,这些只是指向你已有的想法和已有经验的指针——如果你把这些保持在意识里,缓慢但稳定地,它会帮你达成某些领悟,把你带向更平静的内在状态。

2:41:03那是我想要去做的。健身是另一个大块,我只是不是那方面的专家。Twitter 上有很多很好的人,在健身方面比我强。而且我觉得充满爱的家庭和关系,其实会自动从其他东西里衍生出来。如果你有一颗平静的心,而且你已经赚到了钱,你就应该有好的关系,没有理由不该有。不幸的是,很多离婚其实都是因为钱,这就是现实。所以有钱就消除了那一部分。很多外部的争斗之所以发生,是因为你的内在状态不好。当你内在天然平静时,你会少挑争端,你会更有爱,且不期待任何回报,

2:41:41那就会把外部关系层面的事情处理好。所以钱解决你的钱的问题;钱在物质世界里为你买来自由——我记得这是你被剪掉的一条推文——钱让你不必去做你不想做的事。是的,对我来说,钱的终极目的就是让你不必在特定的时间、特定的地点,做任何你不想做的事。我们跳过了一条推文,因为我想把关于长期的所有推文都覆盖到,而跳过的那条是:不存在快速致富的方案,那只是别人靠你致富。这又回到了

2:42:20世界是个有效率的市场:如果有一条容易的致富之路,它早就被利用完了。有很多人会卖给你赚钱的点子和方案,但他们永远只是在卖给你一个 79.95 美元的课程、一本有声书或者一个研讨会。这也没什么,人人都要吃饭,人都要谋生,他们可能真的有很好的技巧。但如果他们给你的是可执行的高质量建议,并且承认这是一段艰难的旅程、需要很多时间,那我认为这是现实的。但如果他们卖给你某种快速致富的方案——不管是加密货币、在线生意还是研讨会——他们只是在从你身上赚钱,那

2:42:59就是他们的快速致富方案,它不一定对你有用。关于这整条推文串和这期播客,有一点是:我们这里没有广告,我们不收任何费用,我们不卖任何东西。不是因为我不想赚更多钱——能多赚钱总是好事,我们在这里也是在做事——而是因为,如果我说“嘿,我知道怎么致富,我要把这个卖给你”,那会彻底摧毁这件事的可信度。那会毁掉它。我年轻时研究这个主题,我最喜欢的一本书之一,恰好就叫《How to Get Rich》,作者是《Maxim》杂志的创始人 Felix Dennis,

2:43:31一位已经去世的亿万富翁。书里有很多疯狂的东西,但他也有一些非常好的洞见。每当我读他写的东西,或者 GoDaddy 创始人 Bob Parsons 写的,或者 Andrew Carnegie 写的——你读那些已经非常富有的人写的东西,而他们的财富显然是在别的领域赚来的,不是靠卖“如何致富”的套路。他们有一种可信度,你就是信任他们,而且他们并不是想从你身上赚钱。他们显然是想赢得一些地位和自尊,对吧,你做任何事总得有个动机。但至少那是个更干净的动机,所以他们大概没有撒谎,大概没有在骗

2:44:05你。从某种层面上说,每个创始人都必须对自己公司的每个员工说某种谎——他们必须说服员工:为我工作比去做我做过的事、去自己创业更好。所以我一直很难接受这一点。这也是为什么我在自己公司里唯一诚实的做法是:我招创业者,我告诉他们,你会在这家公司里获得创业的机会,等你准备好去开创你自己的下一件事的那一天,我会支持你。我永远不会阻碍你去创办公司。但这里可以是一个好地方,让你学习如何打造

2:44:36一个好团队、建立一种好文化,学习如何找到 product market fit、打磨你的技能、认识一些了不起的人,同时想清楚你到底要做什么。因为创业时,定位、时机、深思熟虑都非常重要。但我从来做不到的事,是当着他们的面说:你必须在早上 8 点前坐到工位上。因为我不会在早上 8 点坐到工位上,我要我的自由。或者说:你今天做总监做得很好,明天你就是副总裁了——你知道,把他们放进那条职业路径轨道里,因为我不信那套。如果有人给致富建议,

2:45:09同时又从中赚钱,那他们的钱本该在别处赚到。就像你不会跟一个胖子学怎么健身,你不会想跟一个抑郁的人学怎么快乐,所以你也不想跟一个穷人学怎么致富,但你也不想跟一个靠教别人致富来赚钱的人学致富——那很可疑。任何时候你看到有人真的靠追随某个大师的致富建议而致富了,只要记住:在任何随机过程中,如果你运行得足够久、参与的人足够多,你总会以概率 1 得到每一种可能的结果。这里面有大量

2:45:48随机误差。这也是为什么你必须绝对、彻底地无视商业记者,以及经济学家、学者在谈论私营公司时说的话。我甚至不点名,但比如某位著名经济学家猛烈抨击 Bitcoin,或者某个商业记者攻击最新 IPO 的公司——那完全是胡说。那些人从来没建造过任何东西,他们是职业批评者,对赚钱一无所知,他们只会批评和赚取页面浏览量。你读他们的东西,简直就是在把自己变成 Dumbo,在烧神经元。我用同一位 Taleb 的一句话来收尾,我很喜欢那句:如果你想成为哲学王,先成为国王,

2:46:23然后成为哲学家;而不是先成为哲学家,再成为国王。很高兴你提到 Taleb,因为我本来想用这句话收尾:记住他第一本书的书名——《Fooled by Randomness》(被随机性愚弄)。我们在这期播客里有点含糊的原因之一,是我们试图立下一些永恒的普适原则,而不是只给你昨天中奖的彩票号码。你用两个词总结了这整条推文串:productize yourself。productize 意味着 leverage,yourself 意味着独特性;yourself 有 accountability,productize 有 specific knowledge,yourself 里面也有 specific knowledge。所以所有这些片段你都能组合进这两个词里。每当你在

2:47:10做生意、做任何事,如果你着眼长期、想致富,你就该问自己:这对我真实吗?我投射的是我自己吗?然后我在把它产品化吗?我在把它规模化吗?我是用劳动力、资本、代码还是媒体来规模化?所以这是个非常方便、简单的记忆法。我是说,这个播客是什么?这是一个叫 Naval 的播客,字面上就是用一个播客把自己产品化。你要弄清楚你独特擅长什么,或者你独特地是什么,然后施加尽可能多的 leverage。所以赚钱甚至不是你所做的一件事,它不是一项技能,它是“你是谁”被复制一百万次。赚钱应该是

2:47:53你身份和喜好的一个函数。另一条我很喜欢的推文——这条不是我写的,是别人发的——说:找三个爱好,一个让你赚钱,一个让你保持健康,一个让你有创造力。我会稍微改一下:一个让你赚钱,一个让你保持健康,一个让你更聪明。所以对我来说,我的爱好是阅读、赚钱——我喜欢和创业公司打交道,投资它们、跟它们头脑风暴、创办它们,我就是喜欢围绕创业公司的那个构思和最初创造的阶段。至于保持健康的爱好,我其实没有,最接近的

2:48:26是瑜伽,但我在那上面掉链子了。我觉得那些在人生早期就发现冲浪、游泳、网球或某项运动,并在此后大半生里一直坚持的人非常幸运,因为他们找到了一个能让他们保持健康的爱好。我们讨论完了那条推文串,接下来要花些时间做问答,聊聊那些被剪掉的、没能进入推文串的推文。我的第一个问题是:你觉得人们在尝试应用这些建议时,有没有一些常见的失败模式或者典型的错误做法?很多人并不真正理解 specific knowledge 是什么,或者所谓“如何获得

2:49:05它”。人们不理解 accountability 真正意味着什么。他们以为 accountability 就是成功地负起责任。不,它意味着你必须把脖子伸出去,以你的名字公开地失败,并且愿意让别人恨你。我最近在 Twitter 上不那么活跃的原因之一,就是每条推文都会招来一支挑刺和喷子的大军,很累。但另一方面,你必须学会无视他们,否则你在 Twitter 上活不下去。很多人试图把这跟“我该不该辞掉朝九晚五的工作”协调起来,那可能是个非常难的决定。我不认为你需要走到那么极端。你可以

2:49:39在你现有的职业里就开始应用 accountability、leverage 和 specific knowledge,不一定非得岔出去、完全做别的事。很多人会用它来对自己已有的偏见表示赞同或反对,他们会说:哦对,我同意这部分、那部分;你完全错了。最有意思的部分应该是你不同意的那些,因为那显然证明我确实懂一些东西。所以如果你不同意某一点,那也许正是你可以改进思考的地方。我当然一直在改进我的思考。但我要告诉你,在这条推文串里,我写下的只是“最小可行原则”,我并没有

2:50:16写下我所知的关于赚钱的全部宇宙,因为其中 90% 都是可疑的。我写下的是基石,是我相当确定的东西。而且我至今还没看到一条推文成功地反驳了这条推文串里的任何一点,能让我说:哦对,那条我搞错了。人们容易出偏差的另一个地方是,他们看到这个就说:好吧,这只适用于科技创业者。我不同意。我举的房地产的例子在这一点上就很好。这只是 leverage 的本质决定的:技术会驱动 leverage。所以我会把你往技术方向推,去拿到

2:50:53技术里那些免费的 leverage。显然,这个信息是通过互联网传递的,所以它会带有偏向互联网的倾向。还有人认为,这对那些没有这些机会的人不公平。那用他们确实拥有的机会去做点什么啊。那种失败主义态度——那你早上干嘛还起床?百分之九十的人已经死了;有很多人每天靠一美元生活。你靠一天一美元生活吗?不是。尽力打好你手上这副牌,是你的责任。然后你可以拿这副牌赢来的钱、那个底池,

2:51:24随你怎么用,去修复这个世界。但说“因为别人做不到,所以你也不该去做”,那是活在否认里,那是不做任何事的借口。还有人认为财富创造与环境安全和健康从根本上冲突,他们把整件事看成一个巨大的零和游戏。那也是一种虚假叙事。Elon Musk 并没有在与环境玩零和游戏,而且有很多创业者也不是。要说的话,环保人士很喜欢一个词:可持续。而营利性企业至少在财务上是可持续的。退一步说,你可以做一家 B Corp,它有双重使命,

2:52:03很多非营利事业其实由营利性公司来做会更好,因为那样他们就不用一直去乞求资助,他们在财务上会可持续。一些伟大的创始人就是通过经营企业来实现自己的慈善愿景。这条建议是给谁的?是给我那个 Lyft 司机?还是给一个互联网创业者?还是给一个想开 YouTube 频道的人?因为它来自一个浸淫在硅谷和科技公司里的人,所以它总会带有那种偏向。但我认为它对任何想有创业精神的人、任何想掌控自己生活的人、任何想确定且可靠地提升自己长期创造财富能力的人都适用,

2:52:48只要他们有耐心、看长期。当然,如果你八十岁、已退休、精力快耗尽,你大概就该继续退休。但有些八十岁的人精力还很充沛,想做新的事、为未来而活。它显然很容易适用于年轻人,我会说九、十岁以上都行。最困难的可能是中年,因为我们三十、四十、五十多岁时,已经投入了很多,背负了很多义务,因为那些年是我们在赚钱、别人在依靠我们的年份。我们不想改变,因为我们不想承认自己迄今为止所做的事

2:53:23失败了。但那恰恰可能是最有成果的地方,它可能是最困难的一次转向。你有一份朝九晚五的工作,有一个依靠你的家庭。所以这个播客里的东西可能看起来太理想化了。但也许它可以启发你的周末项目,也许可以启发你晚上在互联网上做的自我教育,也许可以影响你在所在公司里承担什么角色——因为这些角色让你越来越靠近 leverage 的节点、判断力的节点,或者你天生擅长、真实自然的节点。它可能会促使你承担更多责任。即便是我,也应用了这些原则。它们可以

2:53:58在方向上指引你,无论你处在人生的哪个阶段——除了退休。如果你已经退休,那就检验它们是否真实,然后教给你的孩子或孙辈。有很多不同的方式去参与。它其实应该适用于几乎所有身体健全、头脑清醒、并且想工作的人。我觉得应用这些建议的一种方式是:看看谁在从你做的工作中获取 leverage。往价值链上看,看看谁在你上面、谁又在他们上面,看看他们如何利用你的时间和你的工作,以及他们如何对之施加 leverage。人们会

2:54:36自然地这么做,因为他们想爬上企业阶梯,但那主要是在管理其他人。你真正想做的,是管理更多资本、产品、媒体和社群。人们会想在企业内部往上爬,但不太常想到换一个组织,或者创建自己的组织,来获得更多 leverage。总的来说,ceteris paribus——一个花哨的拉丁词,意思是“其他条件不变”——在一个更小的组织里,你会比在更大的组织里做得更好。你会有更多 accountability,会更显眼,你更有可能尝试多种事情,找出你独特擅长的那一件。人们更可能

2:55:18通过“战场提拔”给你 leverage,你会有更多灵活性,公司运作方式也会更真实。一条好的职业发展路径是:先在大公司起步,然后逐步转向越来越小的公司。从一家小公司跳到更大的公司工作是非常难的。大公司往往更讲政治、更不讲功绩,它们更稳定,但创新更少。长期目标是:如果我们都富有了,那就是我们都在为自己工作,而为我们工作的人本质上是机器人。今天那是在数据中心执行代码的软件机器人,明天可能是送货机器人、飞行机器人、机械机器人,

2:55:57在到处搬运东西。这又回到“最好的关系是平级关系”这个想法。如果有人在上面,那是一个可以学习的人;如果你没有从他们身上学到东西、没有进步,那就不该有人在你上面。如果有人在下面,那是因为你在教他们、赋能他们;如果你没有在教他们、赋能他们,那就在下面放个机器人,你不需要人类在你下面。这是乌托邦,而且离我们还很远。但在不太遥远的未来,任何想为自己工作的人都将能与自己一起工作。你可能得做出其他牺牲,你可能得承担更多风险、更多 accountability,

2:56:34你的收入可能更不稳定。但我越来越觉得,年轻一代正在意识到这一点:如果他们要为自己工作……在你的一条推文里,你列出了一些应该学习的东西,比如编程、销售、阅读、写作、算术。有一项被剪掉的,是你还应该学伦理。我原本打算把它放进去,作为对那些认为赚钱是邪恶的人的一种让步,以及认为赚钱的唯一途径就是邪恶的人的一种让步。但后来我意识到,伦理并不一定是你去学的东西,它是你去思考的东西,也是你去践行的东西。我们每个人都有个人的道德准则,至于

2:57:15你的道德准则来自哪里,每个人都不同。我不可能给你指一本教科书。当然,我可以指向一些罗马和希腊的文本,但那不会突然让你变得有道德。有黄金法则,对吧:你希望别人怎样待你,你就怎样待别人。还有 Nassim Taleb 的“白银法则”:别人怎样待你会让你不舒服,你就不要那样待别人。当你在生意场上待得足够久,你就会意识到生意中有多少是关于信任的。之所以关于信任,是因为你想要复利:你想能和值得信任的人长期合作,而不必每次讨论都重新评估,

2:57:48不必时刻提心吊胆。所以随着时间推移,你会自然倾向于和某几类人合作;同样,那些人也会倾向于和其他所谓“有道德”的人合作。所以讲道德其实是一种自私的必然选择。你想讲道德,因为它吸引网络里其他长期玩家,然后他们想跟你做生意。而如果你在有道德方面建立了足够好的声誉,最终人们会付钱给你,只是为了通过你来做交易,因为你是那个能验证、能凭自己的在场为交易背书的人,因为你不会去碰低质量的东西。所以讲道德从长期看确实有回报。但

2:58:29那是非常长期的。短期来看,不讲道德是有回报的,这就是为什么那么多人选择它——那是一种贪心算法。但你完全可以仅仅因为“长期贪婪”而讲道德。我甚至可以勾勒出一个框架,解释所谓伦理的不同部分,全都基于长期自私这个理念。比如,你想诚实,因为它让你头脑清明。你脑子里不会同时跑两条线程:一条是你讲过的那些谎言要记住,另一条是你正在说的话。你只需要一次想一件事,于是你有更多精力去想那件事,所以你的头脑更

2:59:01清晰。而且,诚实也意味着你排斥了那些只想听漂亮谎言的人,你把这些人都清出了你的圈子。有时候这会很痛,比如朋友和家人,但长期来看,你为那些喜欢你原本样子的人腾出了空间。所以这是一个自私的诚实理由。比如在谈判中,如果你是那种总是想为自己争取最好条件的人,你会赢下很多非常早期的交易,感觉非常好。但另一方面,会有少数人看出你总是在争抢、行事不公,随着时间他们会倾向于避开你。那些人

2:59:39最终会成为网络里的交易撮合者,因为人们去找他们求一个公平对待,或者搞清楚什么是公平。所以如果你给别人公平的交易,短期你赚不到,但长期来看,所有人都想跟你做生意,你最终会成为一个市场枢纽:你有更多信息、有信任、有声誉,人们最终都通过你来做交易。很多智慧其实就是体现在你行为的长期后果里。所以你愿意看得越长远,在周围所有人眼里你就显得越有智慧。你愿意跟我们讲讲你年轻时做过的一些工作吗?

3:00:11以及那份具体点燃了你对创造财富狂热执念的工作。这有点私人了,我不想玩谦虚炫耀那一套。Twitter 上有个帖子在传,说列举五份你做过的工作,然后上面每个富人都试图显示自己做过普通工作。所以我不想玩那个游戏。我做过一堆杂活,有人比我更惨,也有人比我过得好。有一个阶段我在学校食堂洗盘子,我说去他妈的,我讨厌这个,我再也干不下去了。于是我靠嘴甜说服了一位计算机科学教授,

3:00:47让我去帮他带计算机科学课的算法助教——而我自己当时完全不够格。这就逼着我去学计算机科学的算法,这样我才能带完这门课。但那份渴望来自在大学食堂洗盘子的痛苦。这不是说那有什么问题,其实任何事都没什么问题,只是那不适合我。我不享受它。我脑子很活跃,我想通过脑力活动而不是体力活动来赚钱谋生。但有时候,正是做错事带来的痛苦,才能给你足够的动力去做对的事。我在一家律所

3:01:23工作过一段时间,纽约一家很有声望的大律所。我在那里做过一个很重要的实习,结果基本上是因为上网逛论坛被开除了。那还是早年,互联网还没成大气候,用的是新闻组(newsgroups),那是我唯一能让自己不至于彻底无聊的办法。我当时是个拿钱过多的家伙,打着领带、穿着西装,律师们需要复印的时候我就得在会议室里待着、复印文件,与此同时我无聊到极点。那是 iPhone 之前的时代——感谢上帝,也感谢 Steve Jobs 把我们从无尽的无聊中拯救出来。那时我常常读《华尔街日报》,

3:01:53或者任何我能拿到的东西。为了不让自己发疯,我连宣传册的背面都会读,因为听一群公司律师讨论如何优化一份大合同里的细微条款真的很枯燥。他们生我的气,因为他们想让我安静地坐在那儿、不许读《华尔街日报》。他们说那很无礼,那是行为不当。所以我被叫去训了好几次,最后终于被解雇了,从我那段极其光鲜的实习中被耻辱地提前送回家,也毁掉了我上法学院的机会。我不高兴了整整一个小时,但归根到底,那是我人生中

3:02:27发生过的最好的事之一,因为否则我最终会成为一名律师——不是说我对律师有什么意见,但那不是我被注定要做的事。你提到过你以前那份餐饮服务的工作,那才是真正点燃这整份执念的事——那是出于嫉妒。我上高中时,得赚点钱付大学第一学期的费用,我必须找份工作。那是 1990、1991 年前后的夏天,正好是老布什时期的衰退。那会儿还活着的人应该记得,当时找工作真的非常难。所以我最后去了一家印度菜餐饮公司打工,结果被派去一个小孩的生日派对上服务——那孩子其实跟我同校,所以我看到了我的同学们,而我在那儿给他们端菜送饮料。那真是极其难堪,

3:03:13我恨不得躲起来当场死掉。但你知道吗,这一切都是计划的一部分,都是动力的一部分。如果没发生过那件事,我大概不会那么有动力,也不会那么成功。所以都没问题,但在那个意义上它绝对是一个非常强的动力源。嫉妒可以有用,但如果你让它跟随你一辈子,它也能把你活活吃掉。但在你人生的某些时刻,它可以成为一枚非常强大的助推火箭。我们前面讲过选择一种能获得 leverage 的商业模式:规模经济、网络效应、零边际复制成本。还有几个被剪掉的想法,

3:03:49我想跟你过一遍。第一个是委托—代理问题。现在心智模型非常流行,人人都想通过采用心智模型变得更聪明。我觉得心智模型很有趣,但我不认为要明确地把它当成心智模型清单来用——我知道 Charlie Munger 是那样做的,但那不是我的思维方式。我倾向于专注于我在人生中反复学到的少数几课,我认为它们极其重要,而且似乎几乎普遍适用。一个从微观经济学里反复出现的——因为我们已经说过,宏观经济学其实不值得花时间——叫做委托—代理问题(principal-agent problem)。这里的 principal 是 p-r-i-n-c-i-p-a-l

3:04:28而不是 principle。所以它不是你要遵循的“原则”,而是一个“委托人”,是一个人。委托人是所有者,代理人是为所有者工作的人,所以你可以把它想成雇员。区别就在于创始人和雇员。我可以用一句名言来总结,这句话要么是拿破仑说的,要么是尤利乌斯·凯撒说的,通常归于其中一位:如果你想完成它,就自己去;如果不想,就派人去。意思是:如果你想把某件事做对,就自己做,因为别人根本不够在乎。委托—代理问题在微观经济学里无处不在。他们试图描述它的方式是:

3:05:08委托人的激励和代理人的激励不同。企业所有者想要对企业最好的、能赚最多钱的东西;而代理人通常想要任何能让委托人对他们印象好的东西,或者能让他们在圈子或公司里交到最多朋友的东西,或者能让他们个人赚最多钱的东西。你在那些掌管上市公司的“雇佣兵型”CEO 身上经常看到这一点:上市公司的股权分布得如此之广,以至于没有委托人剩下了——没人持有公司超过 1% 的股份。CEO 掌权,把董事会塞满自己的哥们,然后开始给自己发低价股票期权,或者大量回购股票,因为他们的薪酬

3:05:47直接与股价挂钩。所以代理人总有办法黑进系统。这就是为什么激励设计如此困难。正如 Charlie Munger 说的:如果你能研究激励,就别研究别的了。几乎所有人类行为都能用激励来解释。研究信号传递,就是看人们做什么,而不是听他们说什么。人们的行动比言语诚实得多。你必须把激励设计对,才能让人做出正确的行为。这是个非常难的问题,因为优秀的人并不是纯投币驱动的,他们不只是在找钱,他们还在寻找别的东西,比如地位,或者所做之事的意义。委托—代理问题是

3:06:27那种你作为企业主永远在琢磨的问题:我怎么让这个人像我一样思考?我怎么激励他?我怎么给他创始人思维?而且我觉得你必须真正当过创始人才会充分理解“创始人思维”这件事有多重要,以及委托—代理问题是个多么困难、多么棘手的问题。我要跟你说的是:如果你是委托人,你本质上就想要花大量时间思考这个问题。这意味着,你要对你最核心的几位干将非常慷慨,在股权和激励上,即便他们不一定

3:07:03意识到这一点,因为随着时间他们会明白。你希望他们在运作方式上跟你一致。当你做商业交易时,与其得到一个在谈判中占了上风的合伙关系,不如得到一个利益一致的合伙关系,双方拿到相同的东西。如果你谈判谈得让自己占了交易的上风,因为最终对方会看明白,或者他们会与你利益不一致,合伙关系就会崩掉。无论哪种情况,它都不会成为那种你能投入几十年、享受复利好处的关系。最后,如果你现在的角色是代理人、是雇员,你最重要的工作

3:07:40就是像委托人一样思考。你越能像委托人一样思考,长期来看你就越有利,因为这是在训练你如何长期做一个委托人,最终你会成为委托人。这也会让你与委托人保持一致,而一个好的委托人会提拔你、授权给你,或者给你 accountability 和 leverage,远超你那个小角色本该得到的。我总是非常敬佩那些会把非常非常年轻的人一路提拔上来的创始人,让他们跳过好几个级别,不管他们的经验如何。而这无一例外是因为这个处在很底层的代理人像个委托人一样思考。所以如果你能破解

3:08:21委托—代理问题,你大概就解决了经营一家公司所需的一半。我先问这一个,是因为我感觉自己工作中从来见不到委托—代理问题。我倾向于在小团队里工作,每个人都高度经济一致,而且人都经过筛选、对使命有承诺;其他不合适的人就转到别处去了。这些都是你设计出来、用来避免处理管理中最大单一问题的启发式方法。另一个能帮你绕开委托—代理问题的启发式方法的例子是:尽可能跟最小的公司打交道。比如当

3:09:08我雇律师、银行家甚至会计师来处理我的交易时,我越来越意识到的一件事是:其他条件相同的情况下,更大的公司通常更差。是的,他们有更多经验,是的,他们有更多人,是的,他们有更大的品牌。但你会发现,委托人和代理人高度分离,而且往往是委托人向你推销、说服你跟这家公司合作,但之后所有的工作都会由一个根本没那么在乎的代理人来做,结果你可能得到不达标准的服务。所以我更喜欢跟精品小机构合作。我理想中的律所是一家

3:09:47只有一个人的律所;我理想的银行家是一个单干的银行家。当然,你要在那个人的资源等方面做出其他牺牲和取舍,你是在这个人身上押重注,但你只有一个脖子可以掐——没有别人可以甩锅,无处可逃,accountability 极高。如果你是代理人,最好的运作方式就是问:创始人不会怎么做?如果你像所有者一样思考、像所有者一样行动,那你成为所有者只是时间问题。我们聊聊凯利准则。凯利准则是把一个简单概念做成的非常流行的数学表达,那个简单概念就是:不要孤注一掷,不要

3:10:32进监狱,不要把所有东西押在一场大赌上,每次下注多少要非常小心,这样才不会输掉整个资金池。凯利准则在数学上给出了:如果你是个赌徒,即便你有优势,每手该赌多少,因为即便你有优势,你仍然可能输。假设你有 51 比 49 的优势,每个赌徒都知道不能把整个资金池押在这个 51/49 的优势上,因为你可能就全输光,而你没有机会回到平均值。Nassim Taleb 著名地谈到遍历性(ergodicity),那是个花哨的词,说的简单概念是:对一百个人平均成立的事,并不等于

3:11:09一个人把同一件事平均做一百次。最容易看清这一点的方式是玩俄罗斯轮盘:六个人各玩一次俄罗斯轮盘,然后每个赢家拿十亿美元——一个人死了,五个人拿到十亿美元;对比一个人用同一把枪玩六次俄罗斯轮盘——他永远不会成为亿万富翁,只会归零。所以承担风险,尤其当平均值是在大人群上算出来的时候,并不总是理性的。凯利准则帮你避免毁灭。现代商业中人们被毁掉的头号方式不是赌得太大,而是偷工减料、做不道德的事,

3:11:50或者干脆做违法的事,最后穿着橙色囚服进监狱;或者声誉被毁,这跟清零是一样的。所以永远不要做那些事。我们来谈谈谢林点。它是一个博弈论概念,由 Thomas Schelling 在《冲突的策略》一书中提出的,我确实推荐读一读。它讲的是多人博弈,其他人的反应基于他们认为你会怎么反应。他提出的是数学形式化:如何让无法彼此沟通的人协调起来。假设我想跟你见面,但我不告诉你地点,也不告诉你时间;我们都想见面,但无法

3:12:30再向对方传递任何信息。这听起来像是个不可能解决的问题——完了,我们做不到。也不尽然,因为我知道你是个理性、聪明、受过教育的人,而你也知道我是个理性的人,也很聪明。我们就会开始想:如果必须选一个随意的日期,我们大概会选新年;什么时间?午夜,或者凌晨 12:01;在哪见面?什么是最主要的会面地点?如果我们都是美国人,那大概是在纽约市,那是美国最重要的城市;那就在纽约市,午夜见面,大概在中央车站的大钟下面;也许你会想到帝国大厦,但不太可能。你

3:13:06可以直接利用社会规范收敛到一个谢林点上。在很多博弈的很多时刻,你可以观察博弈本身——无论是商业、艺术还是政治——并在那个博弈的语境里找到收敛的谢林点。这样你就能跟对方合作。举个简单的例子:假设你有两家互相激烈竞争的公司,它们构成一个寡头垄断。假设它们现在正在竞争,某项服务的价格在 8 美元到 12 美元之间波动。如果它们在从未交谈的情况下都收敛到 10 美元,你不用惊讶。你想聊聊帕累托最优吗?帕累托最优是

3:13:44另一个博弈论概念,还有帕累托改进,意思是在某些方面更好,而在其他方面持平或也更好,任何方面都没有变差。当你跟别人谈判时,这是个重要概念。如果你能做出一个比之前帕累托更优的方案,你总会那么做。帕累托最优是指方案已经达到它可能的最好状态,这时你任何改动都会让至少一个维度变差——从这一点往后就是硬性取舍了。当你参与一场重大谈判时,这些都是要理解的重要概念。不过关于谈判,我一般会说——这是我的一条推文——谈判

3:14:26是由在乎更少的那个人赢的。说到底,谈判就是关于不要想要得太厉害。如果你太想要某样东西,对方就能从中榨取更高的价格。如果你确实比对方更在乎某件事,而他们在谈判中利用这一点占你便宜,那你最好的应对方式就是把它从短期博弈变成长期博弈。试着把它变成一个重复博弈,试着把声誉带进来,试着引入其他未来可能有话语权、或者未来可能想跟这个人打交道的人。一个成本非常高、信息很低、单次博弈的例子,就是装修你的房子。承包商出了名地超量接活、宰客、不负责任。我肯定承包商也有他们自己那一面:房主要求不合理、我们发现有问题、房主不肯

3:15:18付钱、他们不懂。这是信息不足的买家,这是一笔非常昂贵的交易,历来就很难找到好的承包商,而承包商对“什么是好房主”也没得挑。你会试着通过朋友介绍、通过声誉去找。你本质上在做的是:试图把一场双方都有很高欺骗概率的、昂贵的单次博弈,变成一场多次博弈。一种方式是说:其实我有两个不同的项目要做,我们先一起做第一个,然后根据结果我再决定要不要做第二个。你可以把工作拆成两个项目。另一种方式

3:15:54可能是:我先跟你做这个项目,然后我有三个朋友也想做项目,他们在等着看这些项目的结果。还有一种可能是:同一个人在同一个社群里经营,在社群里有一份声誉要保护。还有一种是你给他们写一条 Yelp 或 Thumbtack 评价。这些都是把单次博弈变成更长期博弈的方式,帮你摆脱谈判筹码不足、信息不足的处境。我们谈过复利和复利效应,但没有真正深入。关系就是复利的一个好例子。一旦你跟某人维持了一段良好的关系,

3:16:32不管是商业关系还是感情关系,事情都会容易得多,因为你知道那个人会挺你,你不必不停地质疑。如果我跟一个已经打了 20 年交道的人做交易,我信任他,他也信任我,我们都不必读法律合同,也许甚至不需要起草法律合同,也许我们真的可以握手成交。那种信任让做生意变得非常非常容易。如果 Nivi 和我再创办一家公司,我知道如果事情不顺,我们俩都会极其理性地处理:怎么推进、怎么退出、怎么关掉,甚至在我们扩张的时候

3:17:06怎么引入新人。在这一点上我们有相互信任,这让我们更容易启动生意,几乎是在复利地放大效果,尤其当你面对的是创业公司这种如此难以做成的事情时。去掉这些摩擦机制,往往就是成功与失败的差别。我认为创业公司失败的头号、最被低估的原因,就是创始人之间散伙了。关于复利,有几件不太直觉的事。第一件是:复利的大部分好处都出现在复利的末尾,所以你不一定能在前期看到它巨大的好处。Sam Altman 写过一篇文章,里面有一句很好的话,他说:

3:17:50我总是希望它是一个项目——如果成功,会让我余下的职业生涯看起来只像个脚注。这又回到了那个观点:复利的大部分好处都出现在最后。关于复利另一件不太直觉的事是:我觉得跟人拥有几段深厚的、能复利的关系,比拥有大量不能复利的关系要好。商业中一件被低估的事是:创建一家小企业和创建一家大企业,所花的努力是一样的。不管你是 Elon Musk,还是镇上开三家意大利餐厅的那个人,你都是一周工作 80 小时,都在

3:18:30汗流浃背,都在招人开人,都在努力把账做平,压力极大,都要花掉你一年又一年的生命。但在一种情况下,你得到的公司价值五百亿、上千亿美元,还得到所有人的追捧;另一种情况下,你可能只赚了一点钱,有了几家不错的餐厅。所以,要敢想大。除了零边际复制成本和规模经济,还有其他重要的微观经济学概念值得人们理解吗?价格歧视是个重要的概念,它的意思是:你可以根据人们付钱的意愿,对不同人收不同的价。当然,你不能仅仅因为你不喜欢某些人,就对他们收不同的价,

3:19:12你必须给他们一点额外的东西,而且那必须是富人在乎的东西。商务舱座位通常要花经济舱的五到十倍价钱,但航空公司提供它大概只多花两三百美元的成本。只是因为富人更愿意付。所以你必须给他们需要的那点额外小东西,要么用来显示自己有钱,要么是那一点点他们想要的舒适。价格歧视在企业软件里用得很多:你有免费增值产品,免费版几乎什么都能做,但如果你想要一个更安全一点、或者托管在

3:19:46你自己服务器上、或者有多用户管理(让 IT 人员能监控所有情况)的版本,你会突然发现自己要付 10 倍、100 倍甚至无穷多倍的价钱,从免费产品跳到付费产品。另一个好概念是消费者剩余和生产者剩余,即某人即使愿意付更多、却因为产品对所有人定价相同而获得的超额价值。显然,我从早晨的咖啡中获得很多快乐。我赚了些钱,如果我的咖啡要 20 美元,我也愿意为早晨那杯咖啡付 20 美元。但 Starbucks 并不知道这一点,它不能只对我一个人把咖啡定价 20 美元,因为它在卖完全相同的产品。所以我获得了大量

3:20:25消费者剩余。所有企业都在创造消费者剩余。当有人喋喋不休地说公司多邪恶时,记住这一点很有用。Amazon 也许是一家万亿美元公司,但我敢打赌,它正在创造数万亿美元的消费者剩余,通过便利性和人们的支付意愿。有很多人愿意为 Amazon 的所有服务付比它收取的更多的钱。我们谈谈 NPV。NPV 就是净现值。就是你说:我未来会收到的那一串付款,它今天值多少?一个常见的例子是:你加入一家创业公司,拿到股票期权,

3:21:04创始人说:好,这家公司将来会值十亿美元,我给你公司 0.1% 的股份,所以你拿到的股票值一百万美元。他(或她)在论证的是未来会值多少。你必须把它折现回今天,你必须算出它今天值多少,而且你必须用一个折现率或利率,把创业公司面临的巨大风险考虑进去。你得出的就是它今天值的价格,那也是风险投资人今天愿意投资这家公司的价格。所以如果那位创始人刚以 1000 万美元估值融了一轮,而这家

3:21:36公司只值创始人所说价值的 1%,那你那个“百万美元”的股票包其实只值 1 万美元。所以净现值计算,至少粗略层面,你应该很能心算。什么是定价错误的外部性?你在某个时候提到过外部性。外部性是指,某种产品的生产或消费所强加的额外成本,没有被计入产品的价格。有时候你可以通过把那个成本重新计入产品价格来修正它。如今人们攻击资本主义最激烈的方式之一,是说它正在破坏环境。但如果你因为破坏环境就抛弃资本主义,那你猜怎么着——我们全都要回到前工业时代,

3:22:20那可不是好事。所以,外部性确实存在——因为环境是有限的,环境是宝贵的,我们必须给它正确定价并把它折回价格里。如果人们在浪费水,或者把碳氢化合物排进大气、或者污染东西,你就想向他们收取清理这些污染、让环境恢复原状所需的成本。也许那个价格必须非常非常高。如果你把价格提得足够高,你就能消除污染。这比那些让人自我感觉良好的措施好得多——比如禁止塑料袋、说干旱期间周六周日不许洗澡。加州喜欢发布公告和广告来吓唬

3:22:58你,让你在干旱时期不要洗澡;而那时候,提高淡水价格会好得多。普通消费者洗个澡可能多付几美分,但那样杏仁种植者——他们消耗大量水——就会减少使用淡水,杏仁种植可能会迁到全国水资源更丰富的地方。给外部性正确定价能以极大的方式节约资源。这是一个很好的框架,让你在想做拯救环境这类事时思考如何真正有效,而不是做那些自我感觉良好、实际毫无效果的事。我们最常被人问到的问题之一是:我怎

3:23:35么才能腾出时间来开始投资自己?我还有一份工作。他们会用一条被剪掉的推文来回答这个问题,你说:你需要先把你的时间“租”出去,才能起步。这只有在你同时在学习和积累(最好是储蓄)的时候才可以接受。在一门社会还不知道如何培训人才的生意里,学徒制是唯一的模式。除非你碰巧出生在富裕家庭——那样的话你大概一开始就不会有赚钱的动力。如果你要做这件事,加入一门学徒制很重要的生意——你知道,Warren Buffett 曾去尝试为 Benjamin Graham 的

3:24:10公司工作,学习如何成为价值投资者;他提出免费工作,而 Ben Graham 说:你太贵了。确实如此。在这些学徒制生意里,你大概在短期职业发展上做出了牺牲,但要努力去学那些人们还没完全搞清楚怎么教的东西。这可以发生在你身处一个全新且快速扩张的领域时——还没人搞清楚,或者它是一门非常依赖具体情境的领域,细节非常关键,而且一直在变化。比如基金投资,或者一般意义上的投资,就是这样的技能;创业也是这样的技能。过去五年左右在硅谷

3:24:51出现的最令人向往的工作之一,是当幕僚长,或者跟着创业者做事:最聪明的年轻人跟着 CEO 或创业者,做那个人需要他们做的任何事。很多情况下他们的资历远超这个职位。你可能会看到某人有两个研究生学位,那天实质上是在帮 CEO 跑腿洗衣服,因为那是当天最需要做的事。但与此同时他们也坐在所有最高层的员工会议里,能接触到所有的融资路演材料,以及所有的压力、戏剧性、作秀、创新,和那些只有身处创业者身边才能获得的知识,因为

3:25:27创业者为了公司成功愿意做任何事。而幕僚长一路伴随他们、在旁学习。当然,这显然是非常硅谷中心的科技公司建议。如果你现在被困在一份普通工作里,没有机会以学徒模式学习,而你又需要赚钱,那就去做那份工作。但即便在那份工作的语境里,也试着创新,主动报名承担新挑战、新责任,找出那份工作里学习曲线最陡的部分。你真正想避免的是重复性的苦差——它不服务于任何人,那时你本质上只是在数着时间等你的工作被自动化掉。

3:26:06即便你是咖啡店的咖啡师,也试着想办法与顾客建立连接,试着想办法在你能提供的基本服务上创新,让顾客惊喜。会发生的是:经理、创始人、老板都会注意到。对任何创始人来说,最难的事就是找到愿意跟他们一起工作、并且有创始人思维的人。这是一种花哨的说法,意思是他们足够在乎。而大多数人会想:我又不是创始人,我拿的钱不够让我在乎。其实你就是。你通过拥有创始人思维所获得的知识和技能,会在将来让你成为创始人,

3:26:46从这个意义上它就在付你报酬。你几乎能从任何职位中获得很多,你只需要投入很多。如果我在做一份工作,想搞清楚我该不该争取 accountability、判断力、specificknowledge、leverage——听起来你是在说,在所有这些东西里,最该优化的那一项是 specific knowledge?如果可以的话——判断力需要经验,需要大量时间积累,你必须把自己放到能够运用判断力的位置上,而这来自承担 accountability。leverage 则是社会在你证明了判断力之后很久才会给你的东西,除非你学会写代码,或者你变得擅长媒体——那些是无需许可的 leverage,

3:27:29那种来得晚一些。判断力来得晚一些。accountability 你可以立刻承担:你可以说,嘿,这件没人愿意负责的事我来负责。所以 accountability 是你可以马上站出来的地方,但然后你就公开把自己的脖子放上砧板,你必须交付。specific knowledge 是通过对别人不知道怎么做、而也许你喜欢做、或者天生倾向于做的事承担 accountability,逐步积累起来的。你可能在一家工厂工作,结果发现工厂里最难的事,是懂得如何融资来让工厂继续运转。而这正是工厂老板一直压力山大的

3:28:05事。如果你注意到这一点,然后想:我擅长对账、对数字有感觉、擅长看管钱,但我以前没真正融过资——那你就主动提供帮助,成为老板的左右手。你帮他们解决最大的问题,你很早就会成为公认的接班人。找到任何你有兴趣的事,承担 accountability。不用担心短期报酬。如果你潜入知识的边缘,那里没人知道怎么解决,而你解决了那些难题、承担了 accountability,人们就会站在你身后排队,leverage 会随之而来。关于这个话题,还有几条被剪掉的相关推文,我来读一下。

3:28:45第一条:科技行业是获得 specific knowledge 的绝佳场所,前沿永远在向前推进。如果你真的在智识上好奇,你就会比别人更早获得这些知识。我们周围到处都是技术:勺子曾经也是技术,火也曾经是技术。但一旦我们搞清楚了怎么用它,它就退到背景里,成为我们日常生活的一部分。所以技术按定义就是智识的前沿:它把来自科学或文化的新东西拿来——那些我们还没搞清楚如何量产的东西——而关键在于懂得如何把它商业化、如何让每个人都用上。所以技术永远是你能够获取 specific knowledge 的地方,那里有

3:29:28社会还不太理解的有价值的知识。比如,如果我在机器学习刚开始起飞时成为世界级的机器学习专家,而我是靠真正的智识兴趣走到那里、并把职业生涯押在上面,我会做得非常好。但二十年后,机器学习可能就成了老生常谈。也有一些永恒的 specific knowledge 形式。比如,如果你擅长说服别人,那大概是你早年就获得的技能,它在任何时候都适用,因为说服别人永远有价值。这是那种通用技能之一,光靠它大概不足以撑起一份职业,它需要被组合——组成一个技能

3:30:06堆栈。你可以把说服力与会计结合起来,再加上对半导体生产线之类的理解,然后突然之间,你就是最好的半导体销售员,进而成为最好的半导体公司 CEO。有一些永恒的 specific knowledge 技能,那些是我认为几乎永远无法被教会的技能。然后也有一些时效性的 specific knowledge 技能,来了又去,但即便是那些,也往往有相当长的保质期,十年、二十年或三十年。所以科技是寻找这些 specific 技能组合的好地方;如果你能同时带入更通用的专业技能组合……另一条被剪掉的推文与公司里的 accountability 有关,它说:公司不知道

3:30:50如何衡量产出,所以它们转而衡量投入。用让你的产出可见、可衡量的方式去工作。如果你没有 accountability,就去做别的事。整个奖励人的结构来自农业和工业时代,那时你的投入和产出非常紧密地对应:你在某件事上投入的小时数,是你将得到什么产出的很好的粗略代理指标。今天,它是极度非线性的。一个好的投资决策就能让一家公司赚 1000 万或 1 亿美元;一个好的产品功能可以是 product market fit 与彻底失败之间的差别。所以判断力和 accountability 重要得多得多。而你想要 accountability,是因为有时候最好的工程师或者

3:31:38最好的销售恰恰是工作不那么拼命的人,但他们会在恰到好处的时间交付那一个关键产品,或者做成那一笔巨额销售、那一笔巨额交易,从而成就这家公司,或者至少让这个季度的数字达标。非常重要的是,人们能够看出你在其中起了作用。这不意味着你可以把团队踩在脚下。人类对抢太多功劳的人极其敏感。所以你确实想成为那种总是把功劳分出去的人,但聪明人会知道谁才是真正负责的人。有些工作,你不够面向客户,你有点像是机器里的

3:32:12一个齿轮,你在某种程度上牺牲了 accountability。一个例子是当顾问:作为顾问,你常常给出最好的想法和最好的结果,但它是通过组织内部某个人来交付的。到了那个地步,你可能接触不到组织高层的人,你可能被藏在一块幕布后面——这只是你为了换取独立性而做出的取舍。而顾问,正因为你不愿意玩企业里的老鼠赛跑、企业阶梯游戏,就要明白:有了 accountability,事情顺利时你能得到多得多的功劳;当然,代价是事情出错时你受到的伤害也大得多。

3:32:50你把脖子伸出去,就必须愿意被指责、被牺牲,甚至被攻击。所以如果你是那种在高 accountability 环境里如鱼得水的人,随着时间你自然也会变得脸皮很厚。你会受很多伤,如果失败,人们会攻击你。如果你在做一份工作,我觉得你可以在工作内部应用这条推文串里的很多原则,就像我们刚才讨论的,还包括其他原则,比如与理性的乐观主义者结盟。你可以在组织里找到那些乐观又理性、有能量、有正直、有智慧的人。而它的另一面是:一旦你获得了一些 specific knowledge,规模化它的一种方式

3:33:31就是开始培养学徒,然后把你的部分任务外包给他们。比如,我做了一些不错的投资,也零零碎碎摸清了风险投资这门生意的一些门道,我本可以继续那样做,继续只当一个投资人做投资。但我转而联合创办了一个叫 Spearhead 的项目,我们在里面培训崭露头角的年轻创始人,让他们也成为天使投资人和投资人。我们给他们一本支票簿,一种学徒模式:他们带着正在看的具体交易来找我们,我们帮他们逐一思考每个独特情况。我们基本上是把他们放在我们下面当学徒,学习风投这门生意。这样可扩展性强得多。我们有课程和讲座,

3:34:12把我们知道的东西告诉他们;然后有答疑时段,他们真正带着交易来,跟我们讨论具体交易。结果发现,课程和讲座基本没什么用——你可以在大约一小时内把所有需要给的通用建议都给完,之后所有的额外建议都太依赖具体情境,如果你试图以某种自上而下的方式给出,基本上就抵消归零了。但答疑时段极其有用。它只是再次印证:这是那种只能在实战中学会的技能之一。当你发现一项技能只能通过实际去做、在职场上学会,那就是一个很好的指标,

3:34:45说明你面对的是 specific knowledge。另一个判断你是否在做 specific knowledge 的好指标是:当你问正在做这件事的人“你每天做什么”,他们给不出一个直接的答案,或者只能说出类似“每天都不一样,取决于当时的情况”这样的话——那就是个好指标,说明你在学 specific knowledge。这事太复杂,太依赖具体情境,没法浓缩成教科书形式,也没法由一个赚钱顾问来传授。黑手党很久以前就搞明白了这种学徒模式:最终掌管其中一个家族的最好方式,就是先成为那个家族老大的司机。这可是门复杂的生意。

3:35:26Tony Soprano 说过:我是个必须自己执行合同的商人。非常复杂的生意。