评论
打印
Well, do you, though? Because that's the core question that a lot of people want to know.
并且——安德森：你是这么想的吗？这是许多人想问的一个核心问题。
Surely, Jack, you're constrained, to a huge extent, by the fact that you're a public company, you've got investors pressing on you,
当然，杰克，你在很大程度上受到约束，因为这是一家上市公司，你会收到投资者的压力，
the number one way you make your money is from advertising -- that depends on user engagement.
你赚钱的方法之一是广告——而广告的数量取决于用户参与度。
Are you willing to sacrifice user time, if need be, to go for a more reflective conversation?
如果有需要的话，你是否愿意牺牲用户参与度，来换取更加有效的交流呢？
Yeah; more relevance means less time on the service, and that's perfectly fine,
当然；高效交流意味着用户使用时间的减少，我完全可以接受这个，
because we want to make sure that, like, you're coming to Twitter,
因为我们希望确保，当你来到推特，
and you see something immediately that you learn from and that you push. We can still serve
你马上就能看到一些你感兴趣，想学的东西。在这个基础上，
an ad against that. That doesn't mean you need to spend any more time to see more. The second thing we're looking at -- But just -- on that goal,
我们依然能投放广告。这并不意味着你需要加快速度看更多的东西。第二件我们正在研究的事情是……但是，就你的目标而言，
daily active usage, if you're measuring that, that doesn't necessarily mean things that people value every day.
如果每日活跃参与度是你追求的东西的话，这个指数并不意味着人们每天参与了兴趣相关的事务。
It may well mean things that people are drawn to like a moth to the flame, every day. We are addicted,
它可能指人们每天出于好奇围观的事务。我们之所以沉迷于此，
because we see something that pisses us off, so we go in and add fuel to the fire, and the daily active usage goes up,
因为我们看到一些惹怒我们的东西，然后我们参与进去，与别人争论，然后每日活跃参与度就上升了，
and there's more ad revenue there, but we all get angrier with each other.
因此广告收益也增多了，但最终结果是我们愈发互相仇恨。
