首页>>娱乐>>滚动>>正文

哈尔滨市医科大学附属第二医院看产科需要多少钱度网

2019年06月25日 10:35:20|来源:国际在线|编辑:88社区
The Fourth Industrial Revolution By Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum, 6.99/ .99《第四次工业革命》,克劳斯施瓦布(Klaus Schwab),世界经济论坛(WEF)出版,6.99英镑/9.99美元The World Economic Forum does a remarkable job of forging the conventional wisdom among the global elite. The trouble is that conventional wisdom is invariably wrong. So what are we to make of the theme of this week’s gathering in Davos: the arrival of the fourth industrial revolution? Peak Tech?在塑造全球精英的主流观点方面,世界经济论坛做出了出色的工作。问题在于,主流观点往往是错的。那么,我们该如何理解本周在达沃斯举行的世界经济论坛的主题——第四次工业革命的到来呢?尖峰科技?The book, written by Klaus Schwab, WEF’s founder and published just ahead of the organisation’s annual meeting atop a Swiss mountain, slaloms through the new technologies of artificial intelligence, robotics, the internet of things, autonomous vehicles, 3D printing, the blockchain, biotechnology and so on. The argument is that the confluence of these technologies amounts to the fourth industrial revolution of the book’s title.本书由世界经济论坛创始人克劳斯施瓦布撰写,并在本届年会即将于瑞士山巅小镇达沃斯召开之际出版。该书纵览了人工智能、机器人技术、物联网、自动驾驶汽车、3D打印、区块链(blockchain)、生物技术等新科技,主张这些技术汇集在一起,构成了本书标题中所说的“第四次工业革命”。In case you are wondering, Schwab defines the first three as: the transport and mechanical production revolution of the late 18th century; the mass production revolution of the late 19th century, and the computer revolution of the 1960s.为防有读者不清楚,施瓦布罗列了前三次工业革命:18世纪末的运输和机械化生产革命、19世纪末的大规模生产革命,以及上世纪60年代的计算机革命。He accepts that some people might consider the fourth revolution just an extension of the third but argues that the scale, speed and impact of the latest technologies mean they deserve a revolution of their own. “The changes are so profound that, from the perspective of human history, there has never been a time of greater promise or potential peril,” he asserts.他承认有一些人将第四次革命视为第三次革命的延续,但他认为,以规模、速度和影响来看,最新技术称得上是一次革命。“变革如此深刻,从人类历史的角度来看,其蕴含的希望和潜在危险超过以往任何时候,”他断言。Schwab spells out some of those perils: the unequal division of the spoils of technological advances and the threat of mass unemployment; the erosion of global governance; the potential abuse of robotics, genetic engineering and cyber weapons; the disruption of many established businesses.施瓦布阐明了其中的一些危险:技术进步好处的不平等分配和大规模失业的威胁;全球治理受到削弱;机器人技术、基因工程和网络武器可能被滥用;许多老牌企业遭到颠覆。New technologies are hitting both the supply and the demand side of business, meaning it is often far better to own a platform that brings consumers together than the underlying asset. Citing an article on the TechCrunch website, he notes that Uber, the world’s largest taxi company, owns no vehicles; Facebook, the most popular media owner, creates no content; Alibaba, the most valuable retailer, has no inventory; and Airbnb, the largest accommodation provider, owns no property.新技术对商业的供给方和需求方都造成冲击,拥有一个将消费者汇集起来的平台远好于拥有基础资产。他引用了TechCrunch网站上的一篇文章,指出世界上最大的打车公司优步(Uber)本身并不拥有车辆;最受欢迎的媒体所有者Facebook没有创造任何内容;最有价值的零售商阿里巴巴(Alibaba)没有库存;最大的住宿供应商Airbnb没有房产。In the face of such creative destruction, he notes, the average lifespan of a corporation listed on the Samp;P index has aly dropped from about 60 years to 18. Established companies must rapidly embrace the fourth industrial revolution if they are not to be destroyed by it. “In short, they have to innovate continuously,” he writes, urging companies to move from command-and-control structures to more collaborative teamwork.面临这种创造性破坏,他指出,标准普尔(Samp;P)指数成分股公司的平均寿命已经从约60年降至18年。如果老牌企业不想被第四次工业革命摧毁,它们就必须迅速接受它。“简而言之,它们必须不断创新,”施瓦布写道,他敦促企业从命令和控制结构,转向更多协作的团队工作。As you would expect, though, the global elite’s cheerleaders suggest that promise will ultimately triumph over peril. The fourth industrial revolution is empowering the economically excluded of the world by giving them access to digital networks, increasing the efficiency of organisations, accelerating the development of personalised drugs and — perhaps — providing a technological solution to climate change.不过,正如你预期的,全球精英的持者们认为,希望终将战胜危险。第四次工业革命让经济上处于边缘地位的群体能够接触数字网络,从而变得强大;提高了组织效率;加快个性化药物的开发;此外还可能为气候变化提供技术解决方案。The book’s conclusion follows the classic WEF formula: problems can be solved so long as all reasonable stakeholders pull together in the “spirit of Davos”. Schwab suggests that the fourth industrial revolution has the potential to “robotise humanity”; but, if shaped in a responsive and responsible way, could also catalyse a new cultural renaissance and a true global civilisation, lifting “humanity into a new collective and moral consciousness based on a shared sense of destiny”.这本书的结论遵循世界经济论坛的套路:只要所有理性的利益攸关方本着“达沃斯精神”通力合作,难题就能够解决。施瓦布主张,第四次工业革命有可能“将人类机器人化”;但是,如果以一种响应式的、负责任的方式进行,这次革命也可能催化新的文化复兴和真正的全球化文明,使“人类基于一种共同的命运感,升华到一种新的集体和道德意识”。The book is useful inflight ing matter for chief executives on their way to Davos. But, despite its release on Amazon, one might question its appeal to a broader ership. It is written in a strangely antiseptic Globish, full of paradigm shifts and multi-stakeholder co-operation.对于即将前往达沃斯赴会的首席执行官们而言,这本书是有用的机上读物。然而,尽管这本书在亚马逊(Amazon)上发行,人们可能质疑这本书对广大读者的吸引力。全书以一种异常朴实无华的全球语撰写,充斥着范式转变、多方利益相关者的合作。It is also, as Schwab admits, something of a rush job, amassing ideas culled from his many meetings with Davos luminaries (carefully noted in the acknowledgments). He tells us that is a “crowdsourced book, the product of the collected enlightened wisdom of the Forum’s activities”. Yet it also bears the heavy imprint of Schwab himself, who has presided over Davos since 1971. The word “I” appears 75 times in the text.施瓦布也坦言,这本书成书较为仓促,汇集了他与许多达沃斯座上客(他在致谢声明中仔细地记录下来)接触中产生的想法。他告诉我们,这是一本“集思广益的书,是世界经济论坛活动中集体的开明见解的产物”。然而,自1971年以来主持达沃斯论坛的施瓦布也在这本书中留下了深深的个人印记。“我”这个字在文中出现了75次。 /201601/424074Once in a generation, an automation scare triggers a bout of enthusiasm for a universal basic income — a payment made to all citizens regardless of work, wealth or their social contribution. Today’s discussion of the merits of UBI echoes similar debates in the 1960s and 1990s. But the appeal of this palliative for the replacement of humans by machines is misplaced.这是二三十年出现一次的事情,对自动化的恐慌使得“全民基本收入”(universal basic income)之说大热。所谓全民基本收入,是发钱给全体人民,而不论他们的工作、财富或社会贡献。今天围绕全民基本收入的优点展开的讨论,与上世纪60年代和90年代分别出现过的两场讨论相似。这只能是应对机器取代人类问题的权宜之计,却产生了不该有的吸引力。The starting point for thinking about how a government should respond to an intense wave of creative destruction in the economy is an acknowledgment that previous policy responses have failed. Governments did not have anything to offer in response to the deindustrialisation (thanks to automation) of large areas, and the loss of millions of jobs. People found that their governments had breached the implicit social contract of the postwar welfare state.思考政府该如何应对经济中汹涌的创造性破坏浪潮,首先要承认以前的政策是失败的。面对大片地区的去工业化(拜自动化所赐)以及就业大量减少,政府无计可施。人们发现,政府已违背了战后关于福利国家的不成文的社会契约。However significant the scale of the next wave of automation turns out to be, it would be worth avoiding making the same mistakes again. So it is not surprising the idea of UBI has been revived. But it is hard to see why it would do better at addressing the economic and social costs of large-scale redundancy than the previous policy of making payments to those who lost their jobs. The problem is a hole torn in the fabric of a local or regional economy and society; giving people money is a temporary patch.无论下一波自动化浪潮最终会形成多大的规模,避免再犯同样的错误是值得的。因此,人们重提全民基本收入这个概念也就不足为奇。但很难看出为什么在应对大规模裁员造成的经济和社会成本方面,全民基本收入就优于原来发放失业救济金的政策。我们面临的问题就像是在地方或区域性的经济和社会这块布上撕开的一个洞,而给老百姓钱只能是个临时补丁。Part of the answer must be the simpler one of giving people jobs. If the state is going to have to spend money, it ought to do so through a jobs guarantee, so the people affected have an alternative to the dole. Even if this only pays slightly more, it sustains the benefits of continuing attachment to the job market.解决途径之一当然是选择一种更为简单的办法:给人们工作。如果国家怎么样都要花钱,就该把钱花到提供工作保障上,这样受到影响的人就有了领失业救济金之外的选择。这样做只会多花一点钱,但好处是让人不脱离就业市场。Another part of the policy mix is tackling the wider impact of this kind of economic shock on local areas. The decline of the “left behind” regions of developed economies has snowballed as shops close, people who can move away leave, the quality of schools and public services deteriorates, and infrastructure investment gets low priority because the economic returns to projects look underwhelming.政策组合的另一部分,是着手解决这种经济冲击对当地的更广泛影响。在发达经济体中“落后”地区的衰落不断加剧,商店关门,有能力离开的人走了,学校和公共务的质量下降,基建投资因经济效益欠佳而不受重视。So more important that UBI — whose focus is the individual — is a commitment to universal basic service, with a focus on the community or the natural economic region. If teachers or nurses do not want to move to Detroit and West Virginia, or Burnley and Grimsby, then there should be a pay premium large enough to overcome their reluctance. And the quality of service in local transport networks should be as good in declining as in wealthy areas.因此,比全民基本收入——其核心是个体——更重要的是提供全民基本务(universal basic service)的承诺,把重点放在社区或自然经济区域。如果教师或护士不愿搬到底特律或西弗吉尼亚,伯恩利或格里姆斯比,那么应该提供更高的薪酬,优渥到足以让他们克自己的不情愿。而且,不管是富裕地区还是衰落地区,地方交通网络的务质量要一样好。The UK’s welfare state, like others in the west, was the product of a determination to avoid a repeat of the catastrophe of the Depression and a political imperative to reward the millions of working people who had contributed to the war effort. But while the concept of society’s mutual insurance against large-scale shocks outside the control of the individual is surely right, the insurance is ineffective if it ignores the context in which individuals find themselves. If the robots come for millions of jobs, it will hardly matter that the state provides everyone with a basic income if there is none of the civic fabric of a thriving economy.与西方其他国家一样,英国成为一个福利国家,既是出于避免大萧条那样的灾难重演的决心,也出于奖励曾为战争作出贡献的数百万工作者的政治必要。但是,虽然以社会共同保障来应对超出个人控制的大规模冲击这一概念肯定是正确的,但如果忽视提供这种保障的背景是个体有实现自我的需要,那么这种保障就是无效的。如果机器人将抢走数百万工作,就算国家给所有人发放基本收入,却缺乏繁荣的经济中所应有的市政体系,那也是无济于事。To focus on UBI is to look at the next wave of automation through too narrow a prism. One advocate of a version of a guaranteed income was Milton Friedman, who supported it in part because of its focus on the individual. This is exactly why it would be an inadequate response to a significant economic shock. No individual can deal with a major technological change in the structure of the economy.着眼于全民基本收入,就是通过一个狭窄的棱镜来看待下一轮自动化。米尔顿?弗里德曼(Milton Friedman)曾提倡过一种保障性收入,他之所以持这种政策,部分缘于它对个体的关注。而这恰是为什么这种政策不足以应对重大经济冲击的原因。没有个体能应对经济结构中的重大技术变革。A guaranteed income of £15,000 a year (or whatever the level might be) is a sticking plaster. If the robots really are coming, or perhaps even if they are not, governments should be thinking now about the investments they need to make and the services they need to provide, to everyone, to ensure a better policy response this time around.由政府向每人每年发放1.5万英镑的保障性收入(或随便多少)就像是贴膏药。如果机器人真的要来了,或即便它们还不来,政府也应该开始考虑需要作出哪些投资以及需要提供什么务——面向所有人——以确保这次能有更好的应对政策。The writer is a professor of economics at the University of Manchester本文作者是曼彻斯特大学(University of Manchester)经济学教授 /201705/508714

  • 丽互动黑龙江省哈尔滨市第三人民医院能刷医保卡
  • 哈尔滨市九洲妇科医院做人流可以吗
  • 光明晚报黑龙江七院线路
  • 依兰县妇女医院医生排名
  • 康助手哈尔滨中医药大学附属医院做人流怎么样?百度生活
  • 黑龙江省哈尔滨市四院能刷社保卡吗
  • 肇东第一人民中医院是私立医生活黑龙江九州几楼
  • 豆瓣卫生双城区人民医院能做人流吗
  • 哈尔滨做人流的医院有哪些
  • ask资讯依兰县妇幼保健院在那儿
  • 黑龙江哈市第十医院电话
  • 哈尔滨九州妇科医院TCT的价格健康对话哈尔滨市第九人民医院咨询专线
  • 泡泡知识讷河市第一人民医院网上预约
  • 哈尔滨无痛人流医院那家便宜
  • 呼兰区私密整形哪家医院最好的飞度信息哈尔滨怀孕做人流哪里好
  • 好医网哈尔滨第三医院门诊部地图
  • 美知识哈尔滨市中西医结合医院收费好不好导医分类
  • 哈尔滨市九州妇科医院做人流
  • 健步中文哈尔滨医科大学附属第一医院收费标准康泰网
  • 哈市三院电话预约
  • 黑龙江省九洲是私人的吗
  • 南岗区中心医院看病贵不贵
  • 国际在线娱乐微信

    返回顶端