华盛顿邮报 被免职学者指控哈佛向科技公司低头（3）（在线收听）

    There was a comparison that I thought was really interesting in your reporting from a computer-science professor at Northeastern, talking about the early days of the automobile and how that compares to the early days of tech companies and social-media companies and why they need to be studied.

    我认为非常有趣的是，在你的报道中，美国东北的一个大学计算机科学教授谈到了汽车的早期发展，这里存在一个比较。如何将汽车与科技公司和社交媒体公司的初期比较？为什么需要对它们进行研究？

    Can you talk a little bit about that comparison?

    你能谈谈这个比较吗?

    Right. So, the argument there is that it's parallel to drug safety and to cars, where it's important that independent researchers be able to figure out, you know, how safe the cars are, how they could be made more safe.

    好。这里的论点是，这与药物安全和汽车安全相同。在这些领域，独立研究人员能够弄清楚汽车有多安全以及如何使汽车更安全，这至关重要。

    You know, you expect, I guess, Detroit automakers to do some of this research themselves. But they obviously have skin in the game.

    我猜，你期望底特律的汽车制造商自己做一些这样的研究。但很明显，他们也有利害关系要考量。

    And you need university professors or others who don't have skin in the game to really look closely at these issues and bring them to light, and that helps the regulators decide what to do.

    需要大学教授或其他没有利害关系的人真正密切关注这些问题，并把问题揭露出来，这有助于监管机构决定做什么。

    It's just how things have worked, and they've saved a lot of lives.

    事情就是这样运作的，他们拯救了很多人的生命。

    I think it's increasingly clear that that's needed for tech companies.

    我认为，越来越明显的是，科技公司也需要这样做。

    These are sort of loaded, powerful weapons, in addition to being placed to catch up with your, you know, high-school friends or enemies.

    除了可以让你的高中朋友或敌人尝到恶果，这还是一种上了膛的强大武器。

    The EU is going further in regulating this sort of thing.

    欧盟在规范这类事情上更进一步。

    And it doesn't mean they're going to tell people what to say.

    这并不意味着他们会告诉人们该说什么话。

    You know, you want the academics to be able to get some of the data, which is getting harder now, from these companies and draw conclusions about how this stuff works.

    人们希望专业学者能从这些公司获得一些数据(现在越来越难获取)，并得出这些东西是如何运作的结论。

    But, Joe, your reporting has highlighted a kind of tension here, right?

    乔，你的报道强调了一种紧张关系，对吗?

    That there is this expansion of the field of study around tech companies and how they work, whether they're safe, how they could be safer, but, in many ways, that research is being funded by tech companies.

    围绕科技公司的研究领域在不断扩大，比如科技公司是如何运作的，它们是否安全，它们如何才能更安全，但在很多方面，这些研究都是由科技公司资助的。

    Talk a little bit about that.

    我们来谈谈这个问题。

    Right. So, this is fairly subtle. A comparison that keeps coming up is the tobacco industry.

    对 ，相当微妙。不断出现的一个比较对象是烟草行业。

    And the tobacco industry poured tons of money into research about nicotine and about how, you know, cigarettes work.

    烟草行业投入大量资金研究尼古丁和香烟的运作机制。

    And, increasingly, you know, back then, but also now, you know, university professors are scrabbling for funds in order to get published and get tenure, so you turn to the industry for things.

    无论是过去还是现在，越来越多的大学教授都在为发表论文和获得终身职位而争夺资金，因此他们会转向烟草行业进行研究。

    That's happening in tech and it's happened in a very big way, and it wasn't really subject to scrutiny until much more recently.

    科技领域也发生了这样的情况，而且有很大的出路，但是直到最近这行才真正受到审查。

    It can be a conflict of interest if a company will fund something like, you know, how a community is brought closer together by, you know, Facebook groups or something similar on another network, but they won't fund an investigation into, you know, the spread of fake news and how it gets accelerated.

    一家科技公司会资助一些这样的研究，如，一个社区是如何通过Facebook群或其他网络类似平台更紧密地联系在一起，但他们却不会对假新闻的传播以及如何加速假新闻的传播进行资助研究，这两类研究可能存在利益冲突。