视频库 / REC_023
本页含视频完整字幕与中文翻译。原视频《Manuel Castells: Power and counter-power in the digital society》 · Alexander von Humboldt Institut für Internet und Gesellschaft 以 CC BY 3.0 许可发布（来源）；由苏菲拉底翻译并添加注释。
--:--
点击播放，这里会跟随视频显示当前句的中英字幕。
第 23 期 · 回应 Ⅲ·14「谁在控制未来？」
Manuel Castells: Power and counter-power in the digital society
Alexander von Humboldt Institut für Internet und Gesellschaft章节 · 点击跳转视频
0:06
开场：系列缘起与欧洲视角
10:49
卡斯特登场与柏林情结
15:45
权力与反权力：两种权力形态
20:50
传播是权力的关键工具
27:06
国家与资本在数字环境中的旧逻辑
31:49
数字尾气与全球监控官僚体系
34:45
数据商品化与隐私的终结
44:56
反监控：法律、加密与吹哨人
54:08
公民新闻与网络化社会运动
59:39
从街头到选票：西班牙、智利与美国
66:35
互联网是社会的镜子：后真相与教育
71:56
对谈：认命、恐惧与愤怒
83:39
互联网与民主、理论之争
90:46
不稳定的平衡与数字鸿沟
101:37
社会黏合剂、未来与欧洲的危机
本期讲者
曼纽尔·卡斯特西班牙裔社会学家，伯克利荣休教授、南加州大学教授，《信息时代》三部曲与《传播力》《愤怒与希望的网络》作者，网络社会理论的奠基人，被引用最多的社会科学家之一。
珍妮特·霍夫曼柏林洪堡互联网与社会研究所（HIIG）研究主任、柏林自由大学政治学教授，「Making Sense of the Digital Society」系列讲座发起人。
Miriam本场活动主持人，负责串联讲座、观众实时提问与问卷环节。
01开场：系列缘起与欧洲视角
0:06
Welcome to a special night at Kino International. We are happy you made it through the rain and the cold to make sense of the digital society it's a night to listen it's a night to think about the world we live in to be more precise the digital world we live in and it's a night to talk about it so by the way hashtag digital society and we're going to do all three things tonight I'm Miriam I'm nice to meet you although I can't see you very clearly and I'll be the moderator for the next two hours this night is not a singular event but it's a whole starting point for a series that will take place over the year 2018 and it's a series that is hosted by two institutions one comes from the side of scientific research and the other one tackles citizenship education so as a first start for tonight we'll have a short introduction talk for the lecture and for the series by our two hosts so please welcome with me mrs. Hoffman and mrs. Kareena on stage so these are the people sitting on the couch and watching us via livestream so
欢迎来到国际影院（Kino International）的这个特别之夜。很高兴大家冒着风雨和寒冷赶来，一起理解数字社会。今晚是一个倾听之夜，是一个思考之夜，思考我们所生活的世界——更确切地说，是我们所生活的数字世界。今晚也是一个交流之夜。顺便说一句，话题标签是 #digitalsociety，我们今晚要把这三件事都做到。我是 Miriam，很高兴见到大家，虽然我看不太清你们，接下来两个小时我将担任主持人。今晚并不是一次孤立的活动，而是一整个系列的起点，这个系列将贯穿 2018 年全年，由两家机构共同举办，一家来自科学研究领域，另一家致力于公民教育。作为今晚的开场，我们将请两位主办方为这场讲座和整个系列做一个简短的介绍。请和我一起欢迎 Hoffmann 女士和 Kareena 女士上台。这就是坐在沙发上、通过直播观看我们的观众们，我们先打个招呼。这两位女士是谁呢？这位是
1:46
we just say hi for a moment who are these two ladies this is Jeanette Hoffmann she is research director at the hick the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society short the humble Institute and this one is PETA greener head of the event department at B P B which means bonus and challah for possible young as many of you know and an English I learned a new expression that's the German federal agency for civic education thanks for being here mrs. Hoffman let's start with you because I think you are the reason we are here tonight because you had the idea for the series and for the lecture to put it in simple words how come what inspired or perhaps bothered you yeah thank you very much I've been doing research on Internet related issues for quite some time it's about to stop focusing just on single issues and try to draw a broader picture of the social transformations of our modern societies and I also thought this idea of generating a broader picture should be both historically and theoretically
Jeanette Hoffmann，她是 HIIG——亚历山大·冯·洪堡互联网与社会研究所（简称洪堡研究所）——的研究主任。这位是 Petra Grüner，联邦政治教育中心（BPB）活动部门主管，也就是 Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung，相信在座很多人都知道；用英语来说，我学到了一个新说法，就是德国联邦公民教育署。感谢两位的到来。Hoffmann 女士，我们从您开始，因为我想您正是我们今晚聚在这里的原因，因为这个系列和这场讲座的构想来自您。简单来说，是什么启发了您，或者说困扰着您？非常感谢。我做互联网相关议题的研究已经有相当长一段时间了。是时候不再只聚焦于单个议题，而是尝试勾勒出一幅更宏观的图景，去描绘我们现代社会的社会转型。我还认为，要构建这样一幅更宏观的图景，必须有历史和理论的根基，而不能只是一些轶事的堆砌。所以我的想法是，我们需要
3:15
grounded and not just consist of anecdotes so my idea was that we need to invite great thinkers and I also wanted to put an emphasis on European thinkers and there is a reason for that as well most of the works we see on this issue of Internet in society and its transformation actually come from the origins of the technology the US the especially the US has put a lot of money into research on the process of digitalization and my wish would be that we also cultivate European perspectives and sort of build on our European research traditions and then finally I wanted to create a public discourse that not only involves academics but also the broader public and that's why I'm so glad that we convinced the Bundys centolla to help us doing that and you're here tonight from the Winston trailer from the BPP she just mentioned mrs. Hoffman just mentioned the broader picture too not to have anecdotes but to know what it's all about to see the big picture do you feel the people you address like ordinary people citizens like you and me do you
邀请伟大的思想家，同时我也想把重点放在欧洲的思想家身上，这背后也是有原因的。我们看到的关于这个议题的大多数著作互联网在社会中的作用及其变革，其实源自这项技术的起源。美国，尤其是美国，投入了大量资金用于研究数字化进程，而我的愿望是我们也能培育欧洲的视角，并在我们欧洲的研究传统基础上有所建树。最后我还想创造一种公共讨论，不仅仅涉及学者，也涉及更广泛的公众。所以我非常高兴我们说服了联邦政治教育中心来帮我们做这件事。今晚您来自联邦政治教育中心的温斯顿……她刚才提到了——霍夫曼女士刚才提到了更宏观的图景，不是只讲些轶事，而是要了解这一切究竟是怎么回事，看到大局。您觉得您所面向的那些人——普通人、像您我一样的公民——您觉得他们有这种需求吗？还是说大家手里拿着智能手机、有社交媒体账号就心满意足了？
4:41
feel like a need for that or is everyone just happy with smartphone in hand and social media accounts online well it depends a bit on who we are talking about because we have a quite broad range of what we call what we call target groups but what we what we observe during during the last year's is that there is a lot of in the traditional the traditional community of multipliers of civic education on one hand there like for example teachers there is a lot of interest in more less pragmatic questions so how can they use digital media it in school how can they teach certain aspects of media literacy and but on the same time there's also a quite huge interest in these fundamental questions that will be raised during during this lecture but this always let's that's how what we observe is it always goes hand in hand with a mere rejection of anything that has to do with digital society and well I or my institution we are not sure whether it's where this leads to if you have this attitude doesn't it prevent to also discover good potential of
嗯，这要看我们说的是谁，因为我们所谓的目标群体范围相当广泛。但我们在过去这些年里观察到的是，在传统的公民教育传播者群体中——一方面，比如说教师——他们对比较务实的问题有很大兴趣，比如他们如何在学校使用数字媒体，如何教授媒介素养的某些方面。但与此同时，对这次讲座中将要提出的这些根本性问题也有相当大的兴趣。不过我们观察到的是，这种兴趣往往总是伴随着对一切与数字社会相关事物的纯粹排斥。而我，或者说我所在的机构，我们不确定这会导向何方。如果抱有这种态度，难道不会妨碍我们去发现数字化的良好潜力吗？难道不会妨碍我们更深入地思考、去分析我们如何
6:05
digitalization doesn't it prevent to think deeper and to analyze how we can how we can shape how we could how we can find the right prerequisites to participate and influence the way that the developments will take and this is a very very this is a very very fundamental question for our organization so it's it's one of the core topics and one of the cross-cutting topics that we are going to tackle next year so it was a brilliant coincident that Jeannette approached us for cooperation and it seems they're quite a good match because you were talking about the big picture the discourse and you talked about like breaking it down being pragmatic and and making sense out of it ok let's talk about expectations what do you wish to achieve with the series one of my big issues is the question of agency meaning who actually drives this process of transformation very often when we listen to the public discourse it seems to be that the technology is nearly an autonomous force and I don't think that it's an adequate way of looking at the change we are
能够塑造它，如何能找到合适的前提条件去参与并影响这些发展将走向何方？这是一个非常非常根本的问题，对我们组织而言。所以这是核心议题之一，也是贯穿性议题之一我们明年要探讨的议题，所以珍妮特来找我们合作真是一个绝妙的巧合，而且看起来他们相当契合，因为你谈的是宏观图景、是话语层面，而你谈的是把它拆解开来、务实一些、把它梳理清楚好，我们来谈谈期待吧，你希望通过这个系列讲座实现什么？我最关心的问题之一是能动性的问题，也就是究竟是谁在推动这场转型进程。很多时候我们听公共讨论，会觉得技术几乎是一种自主的力量而我并不认为这是看待我们正在经历的这场变革的恰当方式，所以我们需要更好地理解二者之间的互动
7:23
seeing so we need to get a better understanding of the interaction between society and what we see as digitalization how we actually acquire new technologies what kind of projections predictions we develop etc so what I want to achieve is that we sort of sharpen our view of what's going on and educate ourselves ok what is the best that could happen tonight mrs. green what's the best the best that could happen tonight is that this would be that this would be a start to broaden the platform of discussion on the topics that have just been mentioned by imaginative men because what what we observe is that the discussion about all this implication on society and politics of digitalization is discussed in more or less closed closed circles of experts in the academic world and I think it's it's the right time to open the platform for the debate and well let's be blunt I don't I don't think that we have a representative the representation of all the population in Germany here but at least we started to mix the communities of ppb and the CIM
社会与我们所说的数字化之间的互动：我们究竟是如何接纳新技术的，我们又发展出了什么样的设想和预测等等所以我想达成的，是让我们对正在发生的事情有更敏锐的认识，并且教育我们自己。好，今晚最好的结果会是什么，格林女士？今晚最好的结果会是，这将成为一个起点，去拓宽讨论的平台，讨论刚才那些富有想象力的人所提到的这些议题。因为我们观察到的是，关于数字化对社会和政治的种种影响的讨论，或多或少只在学术界封闭的专家圈子里进行，我认为现在正是时候打开这个辩论的平台。而且，我们直说吧，我不认为我们在这里拥有对德国全体民众的代表性，但至少我们已经开始把 bpb（联邦公民教育中心）和 CIM 的群体与研究所的群体混合起来，这可能会相当
8:44
and the communities of the Institute and this might be this might be quite quite fruitful this might raise cross-fertilization of discourses and over the year we will take up some of the of the topics of the series of lectures and to break it down and to make it digestible for ordinary citizens let's look at tonight's guest because I think that the opening night like sets a tone for the whole series why did you choose Manuel Castells
富有成果，这可能会促成不同话语之间的相互激发。在这一年里，我们会挑出这个讲座系列中的一些议题，把它们拆解开来，让普通公民也能消化吸收。我们来看看今晚的嘉宾，因为我觉得开场之夜就像是为整个系列定下基调，你为什么选择了曼纽尔·卡斯特？
9:22
first of all he's certainly the most suitable person to invite as an opening lecture because he was actually the first one was a social science background who preach the significance of the changes to come he started publishing his trilogy of the Information Age already in the mid 90s that was at a time when perhaps most of the people here in the room didn't even know what the internet is so I thought he would be the best person to approach and then I sent him an email and I couldn't believe it he answered within a few minutes and said yes he would come I feel I mean I was nearly shocked and thought this must be a ghost it can't be him but he did decide to come because he also liked this idea of developing a European perspective ok so it was a brilliant idea thank you for having it and thank you for sharing it with us and obviously 500 400 people came tonight to hear him and to start the series thank you very much so how do we proceed from here we'll first listen to Manuel Costello and his lecture and then afterwards we can have a talk with
首先，他无疑是最适合邀请来做开场讲座的人，因为他实际上是第一位从社会科学背景出发、宣讲即将到来的这些变化之重要性的人。他早在九十年代中期就开始出版他的《信息时代》三部曲那个时候，在座的大多数人可能都还不知道互联网是什么，所以我想他会是最值得去接触的人选然后我给他发了一封邮件，我简直不敢相信，他在几分钟之内就回复了，说好，他会来。我觉得——我是说我几乎惊呆了，心想这一定是个幽灵，不可能是他本人。但他确实决定要来，因为他也很喜欢发展一种欧洲视角这个想法。好，所以这是个绝妙的主意，谢谢你想到它，也谢谢你与我们分享。显然今晚有五百、四百人前来听他演讲，一起开启这个系列，非常感谢。那我们接下来怎么进行呢？我们先听曼纽尔·卡斯特的讲座，然后之后我们可以和他
02卡斯特登场与柏林情结
10:49
him and since it's a talk about digital society we use a digital tool so you can participate in it the only thing you need for that is your smartphone where you can type in the questions you have during the talk I'll explain later on how it works it's not complicated at all and so we will be able to have a conversation with a lot of people in the room so when we announced that Monroe Castel is tonight's guest the registration numbers jumped in too high it's unknown before so we guess that you know who is here so my introduction to him is quite brief Senora señoras please welcome with me influential sociologist professor emeritus at Berkeley author of the information etiology manuel castells bienvenido Thank You Miriam and I would like first of all to thank the humbled Institute for internet society and the federal agency for civic education for their kind invitation that allowed me to be here with you tonight to change a number of ideas about my the research that had been conducting in the last five six
对谈。既然这是一场关于数字社会的对谈，我们就用一个数字工具，这样你们也可以参与进来。你们唯一需要的就是自己的智能手机，可以把讲座过程中产生的问题打进去。稍后我会解释它是怎么运作的，一点都不复杂，这样我们就能和在场的很多人一起对话。我们宣布曼纽尔·卡斯特是今晚的嘉宾之后，报名人数一下子飙升得非常高，这是前所未有的，所以我们猜你们都知道今天来的是谁，因此我的介绍会相当简短。女士们、先生们，请和我一起欢迎这位极具影响力的社会学家、伯克利荣休教授、《信息时代》的作者，曼纽尔·卡斯特，欢迎！谢谢你，米里亚姆。首先我要感谢洪堡互联网与社会研究所以及联邦公民教育中心的盛情邀请，让我今晚能和大家在这里，交流一些关于我过去五六年所做研究的想法。我也真心感谢各位的关注，感谢你们在
12:22
years and I really want to thank all of you for your interest and presence here through the cold night of Berlin and I like particularly to be here with you tonight and I can tell you that it's the secret but why I answer immediately to Janette I have a deep appreciation for Berlin in many ways it's among other things now Berlin is widely considered one of the key nodes in in intellectual cultural political innovation in Europe and this is acknowledged and this is one testimony to human resilience and to the ability to overcome the mysteries of wars and States and bureaucracies to ultimately have describing culture in every aspect to relax before the lecture I spend significant part of the night yesterday night at the Berliner Republic cafe which as you know is open until 5:00 a.m. and and that confirmed my impressions of Berlin I had been several times the but I had not been in the last eight years so the words about the about time to come back of course my most significant experience in Berlin many years ago came to Berlin even
柏林寒冷的夜晚来到这里。我特别高兴今晚能和你们在一起，我可以告诉你们一个秘密，我为什么会立刻回复珍妮特：我对柏林有着深厚的感情，在很多方面。除此之外，如今柏林被广泛认为是欧洲在智识、文化、政治创新方面的关键节点之一，这是公认的，而这正是人类韧性的一个见证，是克服战争、国家机器和官僚体制之种种迷障的能力的见证，最终在各个方面都塑造出了文化。为了在讲座前放松一下，我昨晚花了很大一部分时间待在柏林共和国咖啡馆——你们知道，它营业到凌晨五点——这印证了我对柏林的印象。我以前来过好几次，但过去八年我没有来过，所以是时候回来了。当然，我最重要的经历是在柏林。很多年前我就来过柏林，甚至在那时候，那还是一个被分割的柏林。但当然，最
14:05
at the time and which was a divided Berlin but of course meant the most significant experience in Berlin was in the early 1990 when the moment we still the CDR was there but they it was possible to cross the wall and with a small group of friends both Russian and German we crossed the wall like seven times in a row to make sure that that was possible and that would seem to be unthinkable was starting to create a wall that would unite rather than separate and I was very moved by that experience and since then on I have been coming regularly I presented in Berlin the German version of my trilogy on the formation age a few years ago and that continues to be a part emotional part intellectual interest to be somewhat a little bit part of your society as as you know I are some people know I spent much of my intellectual life in Berkeley but now in Los Angeles but still I spend more or less half of my time in Europe mainly in my Barcelona but also going to other places in Europe to feel the vitality of this cultural interaction my lecture tonight will be relating thank
重要的柏林经历是在1990年代初，当时民主德国还在，但已经可以穿过那堵墙了。我和一小群朋友，既有俄罗斯人也有德国人，我们连着穿过那堵墙七次，就为了确认这真的可行，确认那件看似不可想象的事情正在开始——建起一堵联结而非分隔的墙。我被那次经历深深打动，从那以后我就一直定期前来。几年前我在柏林发布了我的《信息时代》三部曲的德文版，而这份兴趣一直既是情感上的，也是智识上的——某种程度上成为你们社会的一小部分。正如你们知道的，有些人知道，我人生中很大一部分智识生涯是在伯克利度过的，现在是在洛杉矶，但我依然差不多有一半时间待在欧洲，主要在巴塞罗那，也会去欧洲其他地方，去感受这种文化互动的活力。我今晚的讲座将会涉及——谢谢，你们知道，唯一从来没正常工作过的技术就是讲座里的
03权力与反权力：两种权力形态
15:45
you you know the only technology that never worked with a sound technology in the lectures sometimes I decide to just throw away the micro and pick myself since I in my young age I was a actor in theater very close to sociologists and and then I speak with my own voice Adam I am I trust German technology so now I'm going to speak with some detail from here so they the topic of my lecture today to some extent is for me for me the most important topic of the research he had been doing for quite a while as some of this is in my book communication power but throughout the last say six to seven years this has been my obsession because power relationships are the foundational relationships of society this has been my lamb motif throughout my entire career power why because those who are empowered determine shape the institutions and the norms that regulate our lives so in that sense power relationships are the foundational relations of society are the DNA of societies however wherever the interesting thing is that wherever there
音响技术。有时候我干脆决定把麦克风扔掉，自己来，因为我年轻的时候是个话剧演员，跟社会学家很接近，然后我就用自己的嗓音说话。不过我信任德国技术，所以现在我就在这里稍微详细地讲一讲。我今天讲座的主题，在某种程度上，对我而言是我相当长一段时间以来所做研究中最重要的主题，其中一部分写在我的《传播力》一书里。但在过去大概六到七年里，这一直是我的执念，因为权力关系是社会的根基性关系。这是贯穿我整个学术生涯的主导动机——权力。为什么？因为掌握权力的人决定并塑造着规范我们生活的制度和准则。所以从这个意义上说，权力关系是社会的根基性关系，是社会的DNA。然而，有趣的是，凡是有权力的地方，就总会有反抗权力的力量。从这个意义上说，我的分析不是
17:29
is power there is always counter power and in that sense my analysis is not an analysis of domination in the classic tradition of social sciences is always an analysis of domination counter domination power relationships and resistance to this power and the ability and the possibility for people whose values and interests are excluded from the institutions of society to voice their dissent and to attempt as a of the institutions that construct society and in fact our historical experience then and now is always determined by the interaction between power and control power a relentless interaction there is no social peace sorry he's an endless constant interaction between the attempt to impose interest from destitution and the attempt to change the institution democratically or through different means to be able to to introduce new values and new interests in distributions of society and therefore the problem that power has always been largely exercised through two main means and this is also the way
社会科学经典传统中那种对支配的分析，而始终是对支配与反支配、权力关系以及对这种权力的抵抗的分析，是那些其价值和利益被排除在社会制度之外的人发出异议、并试图改变构建社会之制度的能力与可能性的分析。事实上，我们的历史经验，无论过去还是现在，始终取决于权力与反抗权力之间的互动，一种永不停歇的互动。不存在社会的安宁——抱歉，这是一种无休止的、持续的互动：一边是试图从制度中强加自身利益，一边是试图以民主的方式或通过其他手段改变制度，以便把新的价值和新的利益引入社会的制度当中。因此，问题在于，权力历来主要通过两种手段来行使，这也是社会科学传统中对权力的概念化方式。权力有很多
19:09
Power has been conceptualized in the social sciences tradition there are many forms of power but fundamentally there are two major processes institutions of power coercive power persuasive power power over the bodies the power over the minds meaning on the one hand power in the Max Weber tradition has the monopoly of violet but violence by the state well I say the monopoly the monopoly of violence legitimate or not over the state that's that really what has been considered the main form of power but always has been another form of power given that is the capacity of shape Minds to elicit the consensus of the subjects by the action of different centers of power in society or at least the resignation of the subjects that that's the way it is and we cannot do much this is a fundamental process of power which goes long tradition in the social sciences Foucault but also to some extent the notion of glam see about the hegemony in society that was related to this capacity to shape minds to shape the way we think however again this both
形式，但根本上有两大过程、两类权力制度：强制性权力和说服性权力，对身体的权力和对心灵的权力。也就是说，一方面是马克斯·韦伯传统中的权力，即对暴力的垄断，国家对暴力的垄断——嗯，我说的是垄断，是国家对暴力的垄断，无论合法与否。这确实一直被视为权力的主要形式。但同时也总还有另一种权力形式，那就是塑造心灵的能力，通过社会中不同权力中心的行动，来诱导出被支配者的同意，或者至少是被支配者的认命——事情就是这样，我们也做不了什么。这是一个根本性的权力过程，在社会科学中有着悠久传统，福柯，另外在某种程度上还有葛兰西关于社会中霸权的概念，那也与这种塑造心灵、塑造我们思维方式的能力有关。然而，同样地，强制性权力和说服性权力都可能被抵抗，人们会
04传播是权力的关键工具
20:50
coercive power and persuasive power can be resisted and even assisted and people react against the their inability to to be able to go into the discourse and into the debate and in ways that they are protagonists of the debate and that they reshaped the debate and again so there is power and under powerless coercive power and persuasive power in both cases and in both cases but particularly in persuasive power all depends on information and communication information on communication had been the critical tools of power and the critical tools of counter power throughout history why because it through communication people are connected so if the process of communication is controlled by those who are in power then the signals that people receive in their brains comes from a system of values interests symbols that are adapted to what the powerful think or would like that people think about themselves and vice versa the only way to change is when people who do not agree do not accept the social order communicate with other
起而反抗自己无法进入话语、进入辩论的处境，反抗自己无法以主角的身份参与辩论、无法重塑辩论的处境。所以，有权力就有反抗权力的力量，强制性权力和说服性权力两种情况下都是如此。而在这两种情况下，尤其是在说服性权力中，一切都取决于信息与传播。信息与传播历来是权力的关键工具，也是反抗权力的关键工具，贯穿整个历史。为什么？因为正是通过传播，人们才彼此相连。所以如果传播过程被掌权者所控制，那么人们大脑中接收到的信号，就来自一套价值、利益和符号的体系，而这套体系是被调校成符合权势者所认为的、或希望人们对自身所持的想法的。反过来也一样，唯一的改变途径，是那些不认同、不接受既有社会秩序的人，与其他持有相似态度、相似经历的人相互沟通，用我的说法就是
22:26
people who have similar attitudes and similar experience to in my language to reprogram the process of communica in terms of their own interest and again this communication system this information retrieval system never ends and is in a constant dialectical relationship however information and communication are the key factors in the accumulation and distribution of wealth and power in society and the Ishrat history and the actual processes that determine information on communication largely depend on specific technological paradigms meaning communication is very different depending on the communication technologies and information technologies of each time could be the printing press could be the church discourses from the church authorities but throughout history the distribution of pamphlets has been essential in in any kind of of revolution so in other words the way we think doesn't depend only on ourselves or some abstract culture in which in the metaphysical and the way we think depends on the signals that we receive from others so the
按照他们自身的利益去重新编程传播过程。而且，这个传播系统、这个信息检索系统永远不会终结，始终处于一种持续的辩证关系之中。然而，信息与传播是社会中财富与权力的积累和分配的关键因素。而在整个历史中，决定信息与传播的实际过程，很大程度上取决于特定的技术范式。也就是说，传播会因每个时代的传播技术和信息技术不同而大不相同：可以是印刷术，可以是教会权威发出的教会话语。而纵观历史，小册子的散发在任何形式的革命中都至关重要。所以换句话说，我们的思维方式并不只取决于我们自己，也不取决于某种抽象的、形而上的文化，我们的思维方式取决于我们从他人那里接收到的信号。因此，我们的神经网络与传播网络之间的连接，
23:49
connection between our neural networks and the communication networks on which any social activity is based now and in that sense technology does not determine but is an essential medium of organization communication and the interaction between our neural networks on the basis of communication networks the fundamental transformation of our time is the advent of ubiquitous digital communication and information networks anyway the student of mine German actually Martin Hilbert and economies finished his dissertation with me in Samuel is 2010 and published his summary of his dissertation in the journal Science which is consider a standard of scientific research and he this addition was for the first time he calculated they the entire information existing in the planet and the platforms in which and countries and institutions in which this information was processed he showed that 92 percent of all the information in the planet mister measuring in in bytes 92 percent was already digitized now the proportion is about 95 96 percent so we
是当下任何社会活动的基础。从这个意义上说，技术并不决定一切，但它是组织、传播以及在传播网络基础上我们神经网络之间互动的一种必不可少的媒介。我们这个时代的根本性变革，就是无处不在的数字传播与信息网络的到来。总之，我有一位学生，其实是德国人，马丁·希尔伯特，他大约在2010年在我这里完成了博士论文，并把他论文的摘要发表在《科学》杂志上——这本刊物被视为科学研究的标杆。他这项研究是第一次计算了地球上存在的全部信息，以及这些信息在哪些平台、哪些国家和机构中被处理。他指出，地球上所有信息中，以字节衡量，有92%已经数字化了。如今这一比例大约是95%、96%。所以我们
25:28
live in a planet in Whitley and almost entirely information is digitized which allows therefore two things allows the existence of a common language of communication between different sets of information and second allies allows the ability of processing information digital technologies to recombine to exchange to move at high speed in terms of volume and complexity the communication process and how this is transmitted well the other that just give me it's not really datas illustration is reminding you where we are in in our society they currently this of this 90 to 96 percent of digitized information the overwhelming proportion is accessible by internet and wireless networks of communication we have today four billion Internet users in the world on a planet of seven point five and we have seven billion seven billion a planet or seven point five wireless communication numbers not devices not phones subscribers meaning numbers where you can go its cluding children under the age of three although probably this is coming the moment which
生活在一个信息几乎完全数字化的星球上，这带来了两件事：其一，它使得不同信息集合之间存在一种共同的传播语言；其二，它使得数字技术有能力处理信息，去重组、交换，以极高的速度在规模和复杂性上推进传播过程以及信息的传输方式。另外那个刚才给我的——其实不算数据插图——是在提醒你们我们的社会处在什么位置。目前，在这90%到96%的数字化信息中，绝大部分都可以通过互联网和无线通信网络访问。今天全世界有四十亿互联网用户，在这个七十五亿人口的星球上；我们还有七十亿，在七十五亿人口的星球上有七十亿个无线通信号码——不是设备，不是手机，是用户号码，也就是你可以拨打的号码，其中不包括三岁以下的儿童，尽管这大概也快了，到那时
05国家与资本在数字环境中的旧逻辑
27:06
they have also their personal wireless number that means that we have a planet which is entirely connected of course with different technologies different capacities and particularly different culture and educational capacities to use this communication but we are connected and in addition we already have at this point fifty percent of the adult population of the world has a smartphone that is a computer in a wireless device so in this new environment a number of things are happening that deeply affect the institutions of power making and wealth making and here we have to remind which are still the fundamental logics of these institutions institutions in general in society are organized around the state and productivity and the source of wealth in our societies is organized around capital state and capital are still the cornerstones of our social organization so they still dominate anything that happens even in the new technological environment although one of the critical matters about the Internet is that the users of
他们也会有自己的个人无线号码。这意味着我们拥有一个完全连接起来的星球，当然，使用的是不同的技术、不同的能力，尤其是使用这种传播所需的不同文化和教育能力。但我们是连接着的。除此之外，我们现在已经有全世界50%的成年人口拥有智能手机，那就是装在无线设备里的一台电脑。所以在这个新的环境中，正在发生一些深刻影响权力制造和财富制造之制度的事情。在这里我们要回想一下，这些制度的根本逻辑仍然是什么。社会中的制度总体上是围绕国家组织起来的，而生产力和我们社会中的财富来源，则是围绕资本组织起来的。国家和资本仍然是我们社会组织的基石，所以它们依然支配着所发生的一切，即便在新的技术环境中也是如此——尽管关于互联网的关键之处之一在于，
28:42
the Internet have shaped the actual technologies and content of the Internet use throughout their history both state and capital however operate in a given technological environment and our societies that is the digitization of everything States seek to establish and maintain power capital seeks to increase profits this has not changed power is by taine buy destitution or control of communication either government or media control by big corporations the maintenance of power required extensive surveillance for competition with other states and for keeping order internally while capital expansion depends on the real relentless capacity of commodifying everything transforming everything in the commodity that can be bought and sold and again in both processes informational communication meaning digital communication in our society are essential indeed the internet was characterized and it is as a technology of freedom of free communication and it is a technology of free communication because simply because those who decide the internet technologies in the 1960s
互联网的用户在其整个历史中塑造了互联网使用的实际技术和内容。然而，国家和资本都是在一个给定的技术环境中运作的，在我们的社会中，那就是万物的数字化。国家谋求建立并维持权力，资本谋求增加利润，这一点没有变。权力是通过制度、通过对传播的控制来维系的，无论是政府控制还是大公司对媒体的控制。维持权力需要广泛的监控，用于与其他国家竞争，也用于在内部维持秩序；而资本扩张则依赖于把一切商品化、把一切都转变成可以买卖之商品的那种不知疲倦的能力。同样，在这两个过程中，信息传播，也就是我们社会中的数字传播，都是不可或缺的。的确，互联网曾被、也仍然被描述为一种自由的技术、自由传播的技术。它之所以是一种自由传播的技术，很简单，是因为那些在1960、
30:21
70s deliberately tried to have to design a technology that would be difficult to control is one of the greatest paradoxes of internet history that even if the program that led to internet was financed by DARPA the Defense Department of the United States research agency they actually was not intended as a military use by any means was actually funding computer scientists working in designing new forms of computer communication and at the beginning they really didn't know what to use for they mainly they try to use it for using the capacity spare capacity of computers to increase time that they could use the computer so by sharing the capacity of either computers but very very soon they'd arrive to our other uses and the most important first he may lists that are developed by the computer scientists mainly in the US the campus's was about sharing science fiction movies and Nobles and the way to buy weed everywhere this this is the source of internet collaboration they however through that these technologies and that's the critical point technologies
70年代决定互联网技术的人，刻意想要设计一种难以被控制的技术。互联网历史上最大的悖论之一就是，尽管催生互联网的那个项目是由DARPA、即美国国防部的研究机构资助的，但它实际上根本没有打算用于军事用途，它实际上是在资助计算机科学家去设计新形式的计算机通信。而一开始他们其实并不知道要用它来做什么，主要是想利用计算机的闲置算力，来增加他们可以使用计算机的时间，也就是通过共享彼此计算机的算力。但很快很快，他们就发展出了其他用途，而由计算机科学家主要在美国校园里开发出的最重要的第一批邮件列表，内容是分享科幻电影和小说，以及在各地搞到大麻的门路。这就是互联网协作的源头。然而，通过这些技术——这是关键的一点——自由的
06数字尾气与全球监控官僚体系
31:49
of freedom are only as free as they are used for freedom but the fundamental transformation is that all communication became digitized and interconnected and created this the basis for massive global digital surveillance which is the most important expression of power in our society digital surveillance is comprehensive in an entirely integrated digital environment it what we call the digital exhaust the digital exhaust means that all the information is connected and therefore can be treated as a system the key issue is connecting credit cards phone calls computer activity search history ID numbers financial transactions email communication social networking sites and all the interaction the social networking sighs because there's the possibility of connecting everything with everything there is also the possibility of surveilling retrieving information and organizing this information in the interest of those who serve a so what has emerged particular in the last decade is what I call a global surveillance bureaucracy that
技术只有在被用于自由时才是自由的。但根本性的转变在于，所有的传播都变得数字化并且互联互通，这就为大规模的全球数字监控创造了基础，而这正是我们社会中权力最重要的表现形式。数字监控在一个完全整合的数字环境中是全方位的，也就是我们所说的“数字尾气”。数字尾气意味着所有信息都是相互连接的，因此可以被当作一个系统来处理。关键在于把信用卡、通话、电脑活动、搜索历史、身份证号、金融交易、电子邮件通信、社交网站以及所有互动都连接起来。之所以说社交网站，是因为存在把一切与一切连接起来的可能性，也就同时存在监控、调取信息并按照某些人的利益来组织这些信息的可能性。所以，特别是在过去十年里出现的，是我所说的全球监控官僚体系，
33:16
whose major Kuantan lead took place after the 9/11 bombing of New York because that created the basis for funding and legal support in the United States and then throughout the world of extraordinary powers given to the surveillance agencies particularly in the United States they say the National Security Agency but all major countries have strengthened the power of surveillance of their own agencies GCHQ in in the United Kingdom it's it is probably the most sophisticated surveillance agency and the be the end agency in Germany is also powerful surveillance agency and they are all connected that imported thing they are all connected with France and Israel etc they are all connected and the connection is extremely important because legislation in some cases forbid and surveillance agency to spy citizens of their own country so what they do is very simple and this is real life not not just examples the French spied the Germans the Germans is by the French and then they exchange information so that's the most direct
它的主要飞跃发生在纽约9·11袭击之后，因为那为美国的资金投入和法律支持创造了基础美国，然后是全世界范围内，监控机构被赋予了非同寻常的权力，尤其是在美国，他们指的是国家安全局，但所有主要国家都强化了本国机构的监控权力，英国的GCHQ它大概是最精密的监控机构，而德国的BND也是强大的监控机构，而且它们全都是互联的，这一点很重要，它们和法国、以色列等等全都是互联的，它们全都连在一起，而这种连接极其重要因为有些国家的立法禁止监控机构监视本国公民，所以它们的做法非常简单，而且这是现实，不只是举例：法国人监视德国人，德国人监视法国人，然后彼此交换情报，所以这是数字时代权力逻辑最直接
07数据商品化与隐私的终结
34:45
and important expression of the logic of power in the digital age is the cause the formation of of a fundamental a panopticon of extraordinary proportions in which everything is known by governments with very little judicial control in fact at the same time there is a different process that comes not from the state but from capital and the logic of profit which is the commodification of information whose most important effect is transforming consumers of communication meaning everybody into data we are all data that become and these data are key commodities these data are at the basis of the business model of all the major Internet companies Google and others in the sense that as they say in Silicon Valley you are not paying for the service you are paying with your data you are the currency and this goes into advertising goes into political manipulation goes into everything but the most important thing is to retrieve the information for from everybody and here is certain paradox but is a very important one a
也最重要的体现，其结果就是形成了一个规模惊人的根本性的全景敞视监狱（panopticon）在其中，政府知晓一切，而司法监督却极其有限。事实上与此同时，还有另一个进程，它并非来自国家，而是来自资本和利润逻辑，那就是信息的商品化，其最重要的效应是把传播的消费者——也就是所有人——变成数据。我们都变成了数据，而这些数据是关键的商品，这些数据是所有主要互联网公司商业模式的基础，谷歌以及其他公司，正如硅谷的说法：你不是在为服务付费，你是在用你的数据付费，你就是货币。这些数据流向广告，流向政治操纵，流向一切，但最重要的是从每个人身上获取信息。这里存在某种悖论，但这是一个非常重要的悖论，一个
36:18
defining one because communication is free communication free in the sense that people can communicate with everybody because of that there has been a massive decentralization of communication at the same time there is a massive concentration of information meaning all the major companies as well as government's concentrate information from what from the Pratt the massive practice of people communicating with everything and with everybody on a daily basis so because we actually communicate everything the information retrieval agencies can pick up all our information without any problem precisely precisely because we are a highly communicative society at the same time there is a high level of monopoly of information both by the state and by private companies yes we have the notion that we have the rights protecting rights in terms of digital privacy well as you know it Scott McNealy the founder and CEO of Sun Microsystems in 1999 already issued the famous statement privacy in the digital
具有决定性意义的悖论：因为传播是自由的，自由的意思是人们可以和任何人交流，正因如此，出现了传播的大规模去中心化，与此同时又出现了信息的大规模集中，也就是说所有大公司以及政府都在集中信息，信息来自哪里？来自人们每天与万物、与所有人进行传播的大规模实践所以正因为我们实际上把一切都传播出去了，信息获取机构就能毫无障碍地采集我们所有的信息，恰恰正是因为我们是一个高度传播化的社会。与此同时，国家和私营公司对信息都存在高度的垄断。是的我们有一种观念，认为我们拥有权利，在数字隐私方面有权利保护，但正如你所知，太阳微系统的创始人兼CEO斯科特·麦克尼利早在1999年就发表了那句著名的声明：数字时代的隐私？接受现实吧，根本就没有
37:44
age get over it there's absolutely no privacy yes companies have privacy policies written google has a privacy policy please go to the google website and read what is the privacy policy of google i can tell you the only information this is citing the only information Google reserves the right to obtain and process from its uses is the only one name address location email phone number critical number search history browsing habits purchases and selected content of emails other than that privacy respected this is the official privacy policy I am NOT being the magazine and trying to be analytical always so now we are moving into the direction of a new form of total networking and digitization what is called in the pop culture the Internet of Things meaning that what is connected increasingly is machines connecting machines with machine connecting objects and creating a hybrid network in which we are connecting among humans but each one of the humans are connected with objects and these objects
隐私。是的，公司都写了隐私政策，谷歌有一份隐私政策，请去谷歌网站上读一读谷歌的隐私政策到底是什么我可以告诉你，唯一的信息——我这是在引述——谷歌保留权利从其用户那里获取和处理的唯一信息，仅仅是：姓名、地址、位置、邮箱、电话号码、关键号码、搜索记录、浏览习惯、购买行为，以及邮件中选定的内容除此之外，隐私都受到尊重。这就是官方的隐私政策。我不是在做八卦杂志，我一直努力保持分析性。那么现在我们正在走向一种全新形式的全面网络化和数字化，也就是流行文化里所说的物联网，意思是被连接起来的越来越多是机器，机器连接机器，连接物体，创造出一个混合网络，在其中我们彼此连接，但每一个人又都与物体相连，而这些物体之间又彼此相连，不同公司的机器则在
39:13
are connected among themselves and the machines of different companies are organizing the connection according to their programs certainly their programs are ultimately programmed by humans but at the same time the logic of this connection follows certain protocols certain algorithm that the key algorithmic ASUS both for the government's and for cameras are secret and this algorithm such as the ability of a given network to reprogram itself constantly according to some meta program to make it more efficient more comprehensive and faster so we are not that we are moving this is not science fiction I never do science fiction what I what I what it is is we already are in a world of not billions but trillions of networks that all of them are programmed outside control and all of them ultimately have their own logic which is partly taken partly technological and partly linked to the interest of the state and not a large internet companies now the state and companies interact through all kind of technological economic and institutional corporations
按照它们的程序组织这些连接。当然，它们的程序归根结底是由人编写的，但与此同时，这种连接的逻辑遵循某些协议、某些算法，而无论是对政府还是对企业来说，关键的算法都是保密的而这种算法，比如某个网络根据某种元程序不断自我重编程的能力，以让自己变得更高效、更全面而且更快，所以我们不是——我们正在走向的这个并不是科幻小说，我从来不搞科幻。我说的是，我们已经身处在这样一个世界里：不是数十亿，而是数万亿个网络，它们全都是在控制之外被编程的，而且它们最终都有自己的逻辑，这个逻辑一部分是既定的，一部分是技术性的，还有一部分则与国家的利益相关联，而不是与大型互联网公司相关。如今国家和公司之间的互动是通过各种技术的、经济的和制度性的合作进行的，这些公司与那些监控机构签有合同，
40:42
they have the companies have contracts for these surveillance agencies the surveillant agencies make favors to the companies but this is not exactly the same logic in fact during the key moment in which the National Security Agency was given all power to do everything they wanted there was they technologically they were not very advanced particularly they were not able to break some of the encryption procedures so they actually got most of the technology from the private sector and participates from Google from Apple from Facebook and the companies that originally were developing the new communication technologies but at the same time there are some important contradictions because they if consumers start panicking about the total like lack of privacy then they could try to protect the information through the one procedure that companies fear the most encryption and control by them the battle over encryption is a fundamental battle because is ultimately the only way in which we could protect ourselves and the ability the diffusion
而监控机构则给这些公司提供好处，但这其实并不完全是同一套逻辑。事实上，在那个关键时刻，也就是美国国家安全局被授予为所欲为的一切权力的时候，他们在技术上其实并不是很先进，尤其是他们没有能力破解某些加密程序，所以实际上他们的大部分技术都来自私营部门，来自谷歌、来自苹果的参与，来自脸书，以及那些最初在开发新通信技术的公司。但与此同时，还存在一些重要的矛盾，因为如果消费者开始对隐私的完全缺失感到恐慌，那么他们可能会试图通过那一种公司最害怕的手段来保护自己的信息：加密，并且由他们自己来掌控。围绕加密的这场battle是一场根本性的较量，因为归根结底那是我们唯一能够保护自己的方式，而加密能力的大规模扩散——技术本身是通用的，但
42:14
massive diffusion of encryption capacity which the technology would be common but the actual code of each encrypted message would be different and controlled by the user this is what panas governments and word panics companies now companies fear that if they push too much in the logic of controlling and providing information of every one of us to government then the backlash could wring their business model that remember their business model is our voluntary delivery of our lives transformed into data for this data to be sold and organized in the entire commercial world so that we can be targeted as consumers we can predict it and so behavior you go to some place to a restaurant they will know exactly you are supposed culinary tastes the same thing with books the same thing with travel the same thing with everything that's why companies Amazon others provides you with a list of the things that you are supposed to do because you have done in the past so you become a linear program trajectory in which you are the reflection of
每一条加密信息的实际密钥都会不同，并且由用户自己掌控——这正是让各国政府恐慌的事情，也是让公司恐慌的事情。如今公司担心的是，如果它们在控制我们、并把我们每个人的信息提供给政府这条路上走得太远，那么反弹可能会毁掉它们的商业模式。要记住，它们的商业模式就是我们自愿交出自己的生活，把它转化成数据，然后这些数据被出售、被组织进整个商业世界，好让我们能够作为消费者被精准投放，我们的行为能够被预测，等等，你去某个地方去餐厅，它们会准确知道你的饮食口味，书籍也是同样的道理，旅行也是同样的道理，一切都是如此，这就是为什么亚马逊等公司会为你提供一份你应该做的事情的清单，因为你过去做过这些事，所以你变成了一条线性的程序轨迹，在其中你余生都只是自己的映照，而这是一种非常灵活的编程，所以你
43:31
yourself the rest of your life and every is a very flexible programming so you change habits well this is also goes into the program and you are guided in the new direction so the logic of power is not the same thing not the logic of commodity in title because the logic of power as the head of the National Security Agency of the United States said well you know to find indications of a terrorist activity is in the in the wall at large is like finding a needle in a haystack so to do that I need the entire haystack meaning the entire set of information everywhere and then the programs can work but this is the logic of power again is not a logic of commercialization and commodity so there are contradictions and even in some cases companies like Apple have resisted in other cases Mark Zuckerberg has led a movement to stop the government of forcing the transmission of data and in other cases companies simply played this game of resisting and cooperating depending on moment so it's a complex logic it's an interactive
改变习惯，好，这也会进入程序，然后你会被引导到新的方向。所以权力的逻辑并不是同一回事，不是商品化的逻辑，因为权力的逻辑，正如美国国家安全局局长所说的，你知道，要在整个世界中找到恐怖活动的迹象，就像大海捞针一样，所以要做到这一点，我需要整个草垛，也就是说需要所有地方的全部信息，然后程序才能运作。但这是权力的逻辑，再说一次，不是商业化和商品化的逻辑，所以存在矛盾，甚至在某些情况下像苹果这样的公司进行了抵制，在另一些情况下马克·扎克伯格发起了一场运动，阻止政府强制传输数据，而在另一些情况下，公司只是玩着这种游戏，时而抵制、时而合作，视时机而定。所以这是一种复杂的逻辑，是一种互动的逻辑，并不相同，这是两种不同的逻辑，但这两种逻辑
08反监控：法律、加密与吹哨人
44:56
logic it's not the same there are two different logics but the two logics together control the entire information system on which our life depends which are the consequences of this well first of all democracy is threatened by comprehensive surveillance because there is a symmetry between the surveillance and the survey meaning state and companies have access to information to the uses of information to the users information and the uses don't so it's one fundamental difference in asymmetry in in our society privacy is of course obliterated by the communication of data without consent so this analysis and this logic apparently moves toward the so called Orwellian universe of Big Brother controlling everything fortunately things in history and our society as well are more complicated because people have the will under capacity and even needed are not technology they have a passion for their freedom in general terms and institutions of society are not one-dimensional institutions they are the result of historical struggles
共同控制着我们生活所依赖的整个信息系统。这会带来什么后果呢？首先，民主受到了全面监控的威胁，因为监控者与被监控者之间存在一种不对称，也就是说国家和公司能够获取信息、获取信息的用途、获取用户信息，而用户却不能。所以这是我们社会中一个根本性的差异，一种不对称。隐私当然也被未经同意的数据传输所摧毁。因此这种分析和这种逻辑表面上看是在走向所谓奥威尔式的“老大哥”监控一切的世界。幸运的是，历史中的事情以及我们的社会都更为复杂，因为人们有意志去能力，甚至需求，都不是技术本身，他们对自由怀有热情；总体而言，社会的各种制度并不是单一维度的制度，它们是控制与反控制之间历史斗争的结果，所以凡是有
46:27
between control and resistance to control so wherever there is surveillance and where there is breaching of privacy there is also counter surveillance and the defense of privacy operating along various lines of action such as there are there is there are a number of legal regulations depending on the institutions political judicial institutions for instance there is more protection in the European Union than in by far let alone in China however state both state and capital tend to counter the autonomy of these institutions these unstable violence depends on policy choices and ultimately there is in the case of government there's always one key argument national emergency security in a world threatened by terrorist in a world in which the powers of governments are constantly increased there is always the possibility to activate some legislation which goes to through the judicial authority like FISA in the United States with to obtain permission and with the judicial permission then they can operate legally with total
监控、有隐私被侵犯的地方，也就有反监控和对隐私的捍卫，它们沿着各种不同的路径展开行动，比如说，存在着一系列法律法规，这取决于制度、政治与司法机构，举例来说欧盟的保护力度远远超过其他地方，更不用说中国了；然而，国家和资本都倾向于对抗这些制度的自主性，这种不稳定的博弈取决于政策选择，而归根结底，就政府而言，总有一个关键论据：国家紧急状态与安全。在一个受恐怖主义威胁的世界里，在一个政府权力不断扩张的世界里，总是存在启动某些立法的可能性，这些立法要经过司法机构的批准，比如美国的《外国情报监视法》（FISA），用来获得授权有了司法授权，他们就可以合法地运作，全面控制信息。这是怎么运作的呢？很简单，FISA 有若干名法官
47:53
control of information how this works very easy FISA has a number of judges and I could tell something similar about your number of judges which are created by fission judges that are principled independent judges but statistically speaking no one single decision by the National Security Agency has been reversed by a FISA judge not one in the last 20 years that the institution existed so national security and emergency had become the cover of every attempt to curtail the liberty and privacy that democratic societies in principle have but again they are still a number of judicial and legal protections that limit the power of surveillance also technologies of privacy protection encryption and others which hackers continue to develop every day as a way to resist they control the monopoly of information there are also a number of activities by legal social activism number of organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Greenpeace and others that try to show the limits of the surveillance power for instance
关于法官的数量，我也可以说些类似的情况，这些法官由 FISA 机制产生，理论上是有原则、独立的法官，但从统计上来说，国家安全局的决定没有一件被 FISA 法官推翻过，在该机构存在的过去二十年里一件都没有所以国家安全和紧急状态成了各种企图的挡箭牌，用来削减民主社会原则上应享有的自由和隐私；但话说回来，仍然存在若干司法和法律上的保护，限制着监控的权力；此外还有各种隐私保护技术，加密以及其他手段，黑客们每天都在继续开发，以此来抵抗他们对信息的垄断控制此外还有大量合法社会行动主义的活动，一些组织，比如电子前哨基金会（EFF）、绿色和平组织等它们试图揭示监控权力的界限。举个例子，绿色和平组织成功探测到了国家安全局那些秘密数据
49:37
Greenpeace was able to detect the location of the repository of data of clandestine data by the National Security Agency in a remote area of Bluffdale Utah and then flew a blimp over the repository Greenpeace blimp with an arrow saying here is the earth the data of the illegal spying which of course created a whole uproar in other words and the Electronic Frontier Foundation files constant lawsuits against the United States the same thing in the European Union I multiple actions in as well as in the UK multiple actions of legal defense against the system hackers have developed all kind of technology networks to protect free communication and freedom of information in these particular countries for instance the network was constructed originally from Sweden but later explanatory pices two countries tor The Onion Router that for instance was able to maintain internet working partly in Egypt in 2011 during the time Egypt canceled internet or tried to cancel the internet for five days until they gave
存储中心的位置，它位于犹他州布拉夫代尔的一个偏远地区，然后他们让一艘飞艇飞到这个数据中心上空，绿色和平的飞艇上面有个箭头写着：非法监听的数据就在这下面。这当然引发了轩然大波。换句话说，电子前哨基金会不断对美国政府提起诉讼，欧盟也是一样，有多起行动，英国同样有多起对抗这一体系的法律抗辩行动。黑客们开发了各种技术网络，来保护自由沟通和信息自由，在这些特定国家里，比如说，有个网络最初是在瑞典建立的，后来扩展到多个国家，Tor，即“洋葱路由器”，它举例来说曾经在 2011 年埃及关闭互联网、或者说试图关闭互联网的那五天里，部分维持了埃及的互联网运转，直到他们放弃
51:10
up because they were not able to then a very important activity of the whistleblowers like Snowden and others now then is only the last one that there were many others within the security agencies of the United States and of the European Union people who out of principle the site that they have to denounce what's going on it's now then what happened with him is that he knew what happened to those who were whistleblowers before him who were literally damaged for life in terms of persecution in terms of confiscation of their goods of their homes order everything they were written for ever so he prepared his exit way in advance to start his activities of collecting data about what the NSA was doing as part of a heroic mission to respond to this kind of activity against the principles of the American democracy of course he ended up in a Moscow suburb so everybody has concluded that he said was the rationale spy from the beginning was not such he tried to do something else he tried to ask for political asylum in some of the democratic regimes in Latin
因为他们根本做不到。再有就是像斯诺登这样的告密者所做的极其重要的事情，斯诺登只是最后一个，在他之前还有很多其他人，在美国和欧盟的安全机构内部，有些人出于原则而决定他们必须揭发正在发生的事情。斯诺登的情况是，他知道在他之前那些告密者的下场，他们实实在在地一生都被毁了：遭到迫害，财物被没收，房子被查抄，一切都被剥夺，永远背负污名，所以他早早就准备好了退路，才开始收集国安局所作所为的资料，把这当作一项英勇的使命，去回应这类违背美国民主原则的行为。当然，他最后落脚在莫斯科郊区，于是所有人都得出结论说他从一开始就是别有用心的间谍——其实并非如此。他本来想做的是别的事，他曾试图向拉丁美洲的一些民主政权申请
52:40
America particularly he was trying to go to Ecuador but he couldn't he couldn't because once he was in Moscow escaping from Hong Kong every flight in which was suspected that he could be including the flight the flight of president of Bolivia Evo Morales would be intercepted over the European airspace to search the plane to detain Snowden so at one point just simply couldn't move at all and so he's still there and I would guess that at one point the Russian influence starts being significant but was not the origin of the of his of his resistance and as well as the very controversial case of but important of WikiLeaks in which they are not the whistleblowers but they publicize and they distribute throughout the world the informations of illegal or not public activities from governments and companies that should be known by the citizens but they are not they are not so in other words this is to show that the more we go deeply into this system of systemic surveillance and breaching of liberties and privacy at the same time in many different ways individuals
政治庇护，尤其是他想去厄瓜多尔，但他去不了，去不了是因为，一旦他从香港逃到莫斯科，任何被怀疑可能载着他的航班——包括玻利维亚总统埃沃·莫拉莱斯的专机——都会在欧洲领空被拦截，要求搜查飞机，以扣押斯诺登。所以到了某个时候他就完全动弹不得了，于是他到现在还在那里。我猜想，到了某个阶段俄罗斯的影响开始变得显著，但那并不是他反抗的起点。另外还有一个极具争议但同样重要的案例，维基解密在这个案例中他们本身不是告密者，但他们把政府和公司那些非法的、或者未公开的活动的信息公之于众，传播到全世界，这些本应让公民知晓的事情，可他们并不知情。所以换句话说，这说明我们越深入这个系统性监控、侵犯自由和隐私的体系，与此同时，就有越多个人、
09公民新闻与网络化社会运动
54:08
organizations social actives technological activists react and create a counter dynamics which is different moreover there has been the rise today nowadays of what is known as citizen journalism using surveillance technology to surveil the surveillance and to surveil those abuses of power from police brutality to financial wrongdoing this today one of the most important information is that anyone with a cell phone with a camera meaning all the cell phones practically can surprise some personality some bureaucrat some politician some leader of the company anyone doing something wrong or ethically wrong or legally wrong and can take the picture and upload it immediately and that starts a whole process of denunciation protest and sometimes legal action this is what social movement is they do systematically against police brutality everywhere that's an incredible instrument of control that's why every time that people start talking about well we are in a terrorist state because all these surveillance comes up on our like yeah but I can tell you that politicians
组织、社会活动人士、技术行动者以各种不同方式作出反应，创造出一种不同的反向动力。而且，如今还兴起了所谓的公民新闻，人们用监控技术去监督监控者，去监督那些滥用权力的行为，从警察暴力到金融不法行为。今天最重要的一点信息是，任何一个拿着带摄像头手机的人——也就是说几乎所有手机——都可以当场逮到某个名人、某个官僚、某个政客、某个公司领导，任何人在做错事、在道德上或法律上不当的事，都可以拍下照片立刻上传，而这就开启了一整套揭发、抗议、有时甚至是法律行动的过程。这正是社会运动在各地针对警察暴力所系统性做的事情这是一件不可思议的制衡工具。所以每当人们开始说“我们生活在一个恐怖国家里，因为所有这些监控冒出来”，我会说：是啊，但我可以告诉你，如今的政客们，当他们行为不端时——很多人确实如此——他们过日子
55:43
these days when they do not behave and many of them don't they live their lives under you know they they most of their lives they spend their time making sure that nobody sees them that nobody knows about the financial deals etcetera etcetera so is both is both we surveil and we canter surveil all the time and then of course there is a fundamental change that has taken place in social movements and on the world with these particular technologies has been the rise of what I have studied lately of networked social movement that is social movements that is start outside the traditional political parties and traditional institutions and that they organized their own connection or the basis of a spontaneous uprising usually trigger but outrage and not decided by ideology and then from there they grow into major social movements such as occupied in number of years of the Spanish 15 of May movement and movements all over the world in Latin America in Asia even in Africa so social movements of our time our movement in which the capacity to
的方式是，你知道，他们大部分时间都花在确保没人看见他们、没人知道那些金钱交易等等等等。所以这是双向的，双向的：我们被监视，我们也时时刻刻反过来监视。当然，还发生了一个根本性的变化，这个变化发生在社会运动中，也发生在全世界，与这些特定技术相关，那就是我近来一直研究的网络化社会运动的兴起，也就是那些起始于传统政党和传统制度之外的社会运动，它们自行组织起自己的联系，基础是一次自发的起义，通常由愤怒触发，而不是由意识形态决定，然后从那里发展成重大的社会运动，比如“占领”运动、西班牙的 5·15 运动，以及全世界的各种运动，在拉丁美洲、在亚洲，甚至在非洲。所以我们这个时代的社会运动，是这样一种运动：其成员有能力基于自己的理念和
57:08
organize their own communication members on the basis of their own ideas and their own outrage sharing with others without necessarily having an organization without having a common ideology without having a common project these had been completely transformed thanks to their capacity to use a free communication system to bypass the traditional controls now as you know me a number of people but usually traditional media and as well as the politicians of all kind have downplayed the importance of these movements and well they kept tired they produce nothing well in my book there was of outrage and and hope I showed a number of key examples of actual political change and political transformation in many countries linked to the ripple effects to the second level effects of this social movement with that do not happen in one day because they are not violent movements in any way but permit they use the transformation through the minds of the people so the process is social movements organized themselves on the basis of horizontal new forms of
自己的愤怒来组织自己的传播，与他人分享，而不必然拥有一个组织，不必有共同的意识形态，不必有共同的纲领这一切被彻底改变了，多亏了他们有能力使用一套自由的传播系统来绕开传统的控制。现在，你们知道不少人，但通常是传统媒体，以及各种各样的政客，都在贬低这些运动的重要性，说它们不了了之，什么也没产生。可在我那本《愤怒与希望的网络》里，我举了若干关键的例子，说明许多国家里实际发生的政治变革和政治转型，都与这些社会运动的涟漪效应、二级效应相关联，只不过这些不会在一天之内发生，因为它们绝不是暴力运动，而是通过改变人们的头脑来实现转变。所以这个过程是：社会运动以横向的方式自我组织，依托基于互联网和无线通信的新型自由传播网络、
58:21
free communication networks based on the internet and wireless communication interaction symbolic actions sometimes is through the internet but mainly is through the combination of Internet and occupation of urban space and the connection between the two sets of terms urban network and Internet there was on the basis of this they create what I call a space of autonomy this space of autonomy is the beginning of the ability to connect with other people who are equally outraged and at the same time star deliberation and process to provide alternative projects in society without going through the same traditional channels of political organization alright these movements through their action even if they don't seize power in the sense of occupying the state what they do is the influence the transformation of consciousness in the minds of people as has always been the role of social movement social movement and fundamentally aiming at changing the values of society as the environmental movement as the feminist movement as the identity movement of many different
互动、象征性行动，有时是通过互联网，但主要是通过互联网与占领城市空间这两者的结合，以及这两个层面之间的连接——城市网络与互联网。正是在这个基础上，他们创造出我所说的“自主性空间”，这个空间自主性是与其他同样感到愤怒的人建立联结的起点，同时也开启了共同商议与协作的过程，从而提出社会中的替代性方案，而不必经过传统政治组织的那些老渠道。这些运动通过它们的行动，即便没有夺取政权、没有占据国家机器，它们所做的是影响并改变人们头脑中的意识，这一直以来都是社会运动的角色。社会运动从根本上是要改变社会的价值观，就像环保运动、女权运动，以及各种各样的身份认同运动一样。这类网络化的社会运动也是如此，通过
10从街头到选票：西班牙、智利与美国
59:39
kinds so the same thing with this kind of network social movements through their action the minds of the people changed and eventually in some cases political changes also happen at the level of distributions example of this is the transformation of the Spanish political system through the actions of the parties that resulted from the 15 May movement particularly the so called polymers which and now controls about 20% of the Spanish vote or they most recent example because I like also to show the examples that happened with some effects after three four five years after the movement example in the Chilean presidential election in which the leaders of the student movement of four four years ago now decided to create a new party because neither the right or the center left respond to their aspirations and they in the first election they have obtained over twenty percent of the vote and therefore they are becoming the arbiters of the new election the new presidential election in Chile and for you to see they had the leaders of the movement were so young
它们的行动，人们的观念发生了改变，最终在某些情况下，政治层面也会出现变化。这方面的例子就是西班牙政治体制的转型，那是由 5 月 15 日运动中诞生的政党的行动带来的，尤其是所谓的“我们能”党（Podemos），它现在掌握着大约 20% 的西班牙选票。或者说最近的一个例子——我也喜欢举那些在运动过去三、四、五年之后才显现效果的例子。比如智利的总统选举，四年前学生运动的那些领袖，如今决定组建一个新政党，因为无论右翼还是中左翼都无法回应他们的诉求。而在第一轮选举中，他们就拿到了超过 20% 的选票，因此他们成了智利这场新的总统选举中的关键仲裁者。而且你们看，这场运动的领袖太年轻了，年龄还不到法定参选资格，所以他们只能去找一位
60:57
that they could not reach the legal age to be present so they have to ask a friend a nice woman could you be our presidential candidate because we cannot even so in other words the connection goes through communication networks that creates a process of mobilization that ultimately affects not just the people who are in the movement but the society at large least in the case of a Spain there were 70 percent of the population was in agreement with this movement in the case of the United States against what is considered the failure of the Occupy Wall Street movement it actually had a significant success and obtained a support of about one-third of the population in terms of of the support the movement and the hostility only of a 20% of the population they were significant in changing the public opinion particularly amount the young people of America now when someone would say well ok so what a nice political effect thump point is the Trump as much as one can say the mystery of this ignorant sexiest races had regarding narcissus guy become
朋友——一位很好的女性——问她：你能不能当我们的总统候选人？因为我们自己都还不够格。换句话说，这种联结是通过传播网络实现的，它催生出一个动员过程，最终影响的不只是身处运动之中的人，而是整个社会。至少在西班牙的例子里，有 70% 的民众认同这场运动。在美国的例子里，虽然人们普遍认为“占领华尔街”运动失败了，但它其实取得了相当大的成功，赢得了大约三分之一民众的支持，而对运动持敌意的只有 20% 的民众。它们在改变公众舆论方面意义重大，尤其是在美国的年轻人当中。这时可能有人会说：好吧，政治效果是不错，但特朗普怎么说？关键在于，特朗普——不管人们怎么困惑于这样一个无知、性別歧视、种族主义、自恋的家伙怎么会当上美国总统——必须被理解为一种反抗，是对共和党和民主党
62:27
president the United States has to be understood as a reaction against the establishment of both the Republicans and the Democrats that word made possible the election of term but on the other hand there was also another and anti-establishment candidate in the Democratic Party that had serious chances and in fact the studies show that he would have beaten Trump in the general election Bernie Sanders senator who was part of the Occupy movement literally part being in the cups of the Occupy movement and therefore taking a huge mobilization among the young people that was crushed in the process nomination by the bureaucratic apparatus of the Democratic Party to present in in the most unbelievable mistake in politics to present the super-stylish one candidate Hillary Clinton financial establishment and political struggle against the anti-establishment candidate so even even with that tongue being Isis as seriously as his hearing won the popular vote by two million but some concentrated his support in key states where the working class had been hurt by
两党建制的反抗，正是这种反抗让特朗普当选成为可能。但另一方面，民主党内也有另一位反建制的候选人，而且他本来很有机会，事实上研究显示，他在大选中是能击败特朗普的。那就是伯尼·桑德斯参议员，他确实参与过“占领”运动，字面意义上就在占领运动的现场，因此在年轻人中激起了巨大的动员。但这股力量在提名过程中被民主党的官僚机器碾碎了，于是他们犯下了政治上最不可思议的错误：推出希拉里·克林顿这样一位极度精致、代表金融建制与政治斗争的候选人，去对阵一个反建制的候选人。所以即便如此，即便认真看待特朗普这个人，希拉里还是以两百万票赢得了普选票，只不过特朗普把支持集中在几个关键州——那里的工人阶级被全球化伤害了——他做到了这一点。而伯尼·桑德斯本来在这些
63:50
the realization and he was able to do it but Bernie Sanders both had won in these same states and was actually pushed out of the race by they own Democratic Party stuntman this is not to go down to this electron analysis is to show that they were also important effects of the network social movements in the political system even in the United States I could go country after country when there was a movement it doesn't mean that because there were no movers in in in our countries when there was a movement that had a significant effect now these social movements could not have existed without the capacity to communicate through digital networks of communication absolutely not could be some protest but they can what they were what they did was possible because of this new communication technologies problem is of course that they were able to do so but at the same time they were somewhat prisoner of the network technologies that existed they communicated through Twitter through Facebook through Instagram etc however
同样的州也是能赢的，却被他自己所在的民主党挤出了这场竞选。说这些不是要深入做选举分析，而是想说明，网络化社会运动对政治体制也产生了重要影响，哪怕在美国也是如此。我可以一个国家一个国家地讲下去——凡是有运动的地方，这并不是说我们的国家里没有推动者，而是说，凡是出现过运动的地方，它都产生了显著的影响。而这些社会运动，如果没有通过数字传播网络进行沟通的能力，是根本不可能存在的，绝对不可能。抗议或许还会有，但它们之所以成为那样、之所以能做成那些事，是因为有了这些新的传播技术。当然，问题在于，它们虽然做到了，但与此同时它们在某种程度上也成了既有网络技术的囚徒——它们通过推特、脸书、Instagram 等等来沟通。不过
65:14
they are very conscious of that and they have developed a series of new technologies of communication that could be encrypted and not controlled by for instance Facebook but just in case toward the future particularly they develop some technology encrypted angle con n minus one the problem is that very limited works very well in a small network but not in large number but a number of other experiences and ultimately all these movements are massively using a different kind of networking technology telegram that was in developed in Germany by Russian hackers that emigrated from Russia but work on the possibility of generating encrypted technologies for the communication of social movements independent from the other major institutions so Internet ultimately has become has shown its potential as a space of free expression and disintermediation of communication control that way the defence of Internet freedom has become one of the fundamental political battles for the world because of course Internet in
它们对此非常清醒，也开发出了一系列新的传播技术，可以加密，不被比如脸书这样的公司控制。为了未来做准备，它们特别开发了一些加密技术，比如 n-1 之类。问题是这类技术很受限，在小规模网络里运作得很好，但在大规模人群中就不行了。还有其他一些尝试，最终这些运动都在大规模使用另一种网络技术——Telegram。它是在德国开发的，开发者是从俄罗斯移民出来的俄国黑客，他们致力于开发加密技术，让社会运动的沟通能够独立于其他主要机构。所以互联网最终展现出了它的潜力：一个自由表达的空间，一个打破传播控制中介化的空间。因此，捍卫互联网自由已经成为全世界最根本的政治斗争之一。因为当然，互联网
11互联网是社会的镜子：后真相与教育
66:35
itself cannot be control but it can be intercepted in many ways and also they those who propose messages that are anti-establishment in the Internet can be identified for instance in China and punished however I always say having a studied in death the Chinese system of control that yes the messenger can be identified and punished and sent to prison and there are many many many hundreds of Chinese activist in jail however the message cannot be intercepted the message as such would have to be intercepted in the entire internet level and this is literally impossible so if you are the messenger that's important but if you are the message you can go on and live and communicate and defuse and in that sense the net is space of free communication free communication doesn't mean the kind of freedom for the uses that we would like in normative terms the tram movement was very active in organizing network of racist and sexist mobilizations and the same thing in Germany with a neo-nazi parties an alternative for Germany etc so the fact
本身无法被控制，但它可以通过很多方式被拦截，而那些在互联网上发出反建制信息的人也可能被识别出来——比如在中国——并受到惩罚。不过我一直说，我深入研究过中国的控制体系，是的，信使可以被识别、被惩罚、被送进监狱，确实有成百上千的中国活动人士在狱中。然而，信息本身无法被拦截。要拦截信息本身，就得在整个互联网层面上去拦截，而这实际上是不可能的。所以如果你是那个信使，那确实要紧；但如果你是那条信息，你就能继续存在、继续传播、继续扩散。从这个意义上说，网络是自由沟通的空间。自由沟通并不意味着这种自由会被用在我们从规范角度所期待的用途上。特朗普运动就非常积极地组织种族主义和性别歧视的动员网络，德国也一样，有新纳粹政党、德国另类选择党等等。所以
68:06
the Internet has free communication it doesn't mean that this is for the good uses according to each one's taste if for whatever happens in society internet is the mirror of society how good or how bad Society is each one of us that is immediately reflected in the internet so the key question is not about the if technology is good or bad because it's not as the great historian of Technology Marvin Glasper said technology is neither good or bad neither it is neutral meaning what that is very important but the defects the effects are undetermined Internet is use to be and is free communication system but the uses of this freedom are socially determined social media social networks now are largely taken over the communication space and largely pushing aside the mass media mass media were not always reliable were not always diverse system of communication and not always as truthful as they want to say they are for instance remember the great New York Times reporting the existence of weapons
互联网具有自由沟通这一点，并不意味着它会按照每个人的口味被用于好的用途。社会上发生什么，互联网就是社会的镜子——社会有多好、有多坏，我们每个人是什么样，都会立刻反映在互联网上。所以关键问题不在于技术是好是坏，因为它两者都不是。正如伟大的技术史学家梅尔文·克兰兹伯格所说：技术既不好也不坏，但它也不是中立的。这意味着什么？这非常重要——它的效果是不确定的。互联网过去是、现在也是一个自由的传播系统，但这种自由如何被使用，是由社会决定的。社交媒体、社交网络如今在很大程度上接管了传播空间，很大程度上把大众媒体挤到了一边。大众媒体并不总是可靠的，也不总是一个多元的传播体系，更不总像它们自称的那样真实。比如，还记得伟大的《纽约时报》曾报道伊拉克拥有大规模杀伤性武器，帮助引发了那场战争。但在很大程度上，
69:28
of mass destruction in Iraq helping to trigger the world but to a large extent the most important thing now is not the replacement of one system another but what I call a general cacophony of information and ideas in the in the social networks the period of post truth they called now lives are called post truth so every everything is there lies BOTS that multiply by hundreds and thousands they fake news that are circulating in the in the Internet and in the social network and we do something about that yes and no because technologically even if some of the both programs can be deactivated by fake news is literally impossible to control these people produce fake news if people pollute the information over the Internet so the only answer is the ability of educated citizens informed citizens to actively participate in these exchanges and correct information and correct ideas according to their experience to the values and to their interest and I finish the issue is that in a new technological environment which have tried to show the historical
现在最重要的不是一个体系取代另一个体系，而是我所说的社交网络中信息与观念的普遍喧嚣杂音，也就是所谓“后真相”时期。如今谎言被称作后真相，所以一切都在那里：谎言、成百上千倍放大的机器人账号，还有在互联网和社交网络上流传的假新闻。我们能对此做点什么吗？答案是既能也不能。因为从技术上讲，即便有些机器人程序可以被关停，假新闻实际上是无法控制的——只要有人制造假新闻，只要有人污染互联网上的信息。所以唯一的答案，是有教养的公民、知情的公民有能力积极参与这些交流，根据自己的经验、价值观和利益去纠正信息、纠正观念。最后我要说的是，问题在于，在一个全新的技术环境中——我试图说明它在历史上的新颖之处——我们面对的仍然是最古老的社会斗争：我们仍然要斗争，
70:57
novelty we still have the oldest social struggle we still have the struggle against the abuses of power from the state and the exploitation from monopoly companies and this struggle continues to be and will continue to be in the fence of the freedom and dignity of the humankind new technologies or the issues all form of oppression and all new forms of struggle and response to the pressure thank you for your tears
反抗国家的权力滥用，反抗垄断企业的剥削。而这场斗争过去是、将来也会继续是为了捍卫人类的自由与尊严。新技术带来了各种形式的压迫，也带来了各种新形式的斗争与回应。谢谢大家的聆听。
12对谈：认命、恐惧与愤怒
71:56
chamomile medium thanks for coming so it's time for our talk now and not only between Manuel Castells and me but between you and him if you would like to tweet that's for you yeah because I have my own if you'd like to twitter the hashtag is digital society and if you would like to participate here or from your couch or sofa or whatever wherever you are you can use your smartphone if you need the internet right here at Kenan Tennyson al the password is digital 2017 so you can just open your browser and go to the website that is down here manty calm and the next step is that you type it in the code you see there 8 4 7 0 9 4 and with that you should be able to type in a question it's the same like intuitive it's 140 characters so be sure to be precise with your questions and let's just try out if it works good question the problem is that we said okay 500 people in a room if we have one microphone it's a question of power who gets it you know so we chose to use that tool so that many people can participate I can
非常感谢各位的到来。现在到了我们对谈的时间，不只是我和曼纽尔·卡斯特之间的对谈，也是你们和他之间的对谈。如果你们想发推特，那是给你们用的——因为我有我自己的。如果你们想在推特上参与，话题标签是 digital society。如果你们想在现场或者在自家沙发上、不管你们在哪里参与，都可以用你们的智能手机。如果需要网络，这里就有，网络名是 Kenan Tennyson，密码是digital 2017。你们只要打开浏览器，进到下面这个网址 menti.com，下一步就是输入你们看到的代码：8 4 7 0 9 4。之后你们就可以输入问题了。它很直观，限 140 个字符，所以请把问题提得精准一些。我们先试试看能不能用。好问题。问题在于，我们说好了，房间里有 500 个人，如果只有一个麦克风，那就变成了权力问题——谁能拿到麦克风。所以我们选择用这个工具，这样更多人可以参与。我可以
73:45
tell you one problem there is no escape in that sense you can counter with your ideas they what the surveillance tries to impose but this is being recorded okay and and it's being a stream so we are in the system they you know we one thing sorry the time the situation but this is a critical point how I cannot but well it's very simple don't be in Facebook don't be in Twitter don't be in any social network at all don't be in YouTube don't don't be in anything don't use Google of course don't don't use by do if you are in China don't don't use anything and in addition don't use credit cards and never give your ID connected to any electronic transaction that you have and if you do Bitcoin be careful because Bitcoin also transmits data okay so it's there no way not to be in the visitors exhaust is not to confirm to any of the current practice and habits of society that why is so tricky so we're not citizens anymore I see that you it's working the tool is working we I would like to ask you to just type in shortly why you're here you have already typed
告诉你们一个问题：从这个意义上说，无处可逃。你可以用你的想法去对抗监控想要强加的东西，但这一切正在被录下来，好吧，而且还在直播。所以我们就在这个系统里面。抱歉打断，时间和情况就是这样，但这是个关键点，我怎么才能……这个嘛，其实很简单：别用脸书，别用推特，别加入任何社交网络，别用 YouTube，什么都别用，当然也别用谷歌，如果你在中国就别用百度，什么都别用。除此之外，还别用信用卡，永远不要把你的身份信息和任何电子交易绑定在一起。如果你用比特币，也要小心，因为比特币同样会传输数据。所以根本没有办法不留下数据尾气，除非你完全不遵从当今社会的任何做法和习惯，这就是它棘手的地方。所以我们已经不再是公民了。我看到工具起作用了，能用了。我想请大家简短地输入一下你们为什么来这里。你们已经输入了
75:09
him some questions let's just see why your tonight because mrs. Hoffman for example she said I'm here to have the bigger picture that's why I mean my reason for being here so let's just check out the tool if it works and riot why you're here what your reason is to be here interest is one answer
一些问题，我们先看看今晚你们为什么来。比如霍夫曼女士说，她来这里是为了看到更完整的图景，这也是我来这里的理由。所以我们先试试这个工具能不能用，写下你们为什么在这里、你们来的理由是什么。“出于兴趣”是一个回答，
75:34
to better understand our society today is one of the reasons this is the the audience nuts not me and there's someone riding master thesis on this course of power on Twitter so it's a concrete academic interest I would say okay so let's go on to the question part so you can type in your questions now I just put on the next slide so you should be able to type in your questions and we continue why we're waiting for the questions then you send your castells I switch between Spanish and and English I'm sorry Catalan oh I'm sorry
“为了更好地理解今天的社会”也是理由之一。这些是现场观众的回答，不是我写的。还有人在写关于推特上权力的硕士论文，所以这是很具体的学术兴趣。好，那我们进入提问环节，现在你们可以输入问题了。我先切到下一张幻灯片，这样你们就可以输入问题。在等问题的时候我们继续。卡斯特教授，我在西班牙语和英语之间来回切换——抱歉，是加泰罗尼亚语，不好意思。
76:35
you mentioned that shaping our minds is where power comes from the ability to shape minds is the fundamental source of power and you once said that torturing body is it's less effective than shaping the minds this is why pure repression won't last so let's see where that power exactly comes from how does it work let's have a closer look at it well it can be promoting the main thing is resignation but can be promoting the idea that your life is better if you simply mold your life what is happening already and the instructions that that you do if you are a good citizen in the sense that you just follow the norms and you follow instructions as women or three generations ago were told by their mothers and grandmothers you have to do this way up this way or you will not be able to marry and then you're in trouble that's one way or the other which is more and more frequent is what I call resignation meaning there is no other way and the system in in terms of when you don't follow some of the basic rules
您提到，塑造我们的思想才是权力的来源，塑造头脑的能力是权力最根本的来源；您还说过，折磨身体的效果不如塑造思想，这就是为什么纯粹的压制无法持久。那我们来看看这种权力究竟来自哪里、如何运作，我们来仔细看一看。嗯，它可以是宣扬——最主要的其实是“认命”，但也可以是宣扬这样一种观念：如果你只是顺着已经发生的事情去塑造自己的生活、遵从那些指令，你的日子会更好过；也就是说，只要你做个好公民，遵守规范、照指令行事。就像两三代人以前，女性被她们的母亲、祖母告知：你必须这样、必须那样，否则你就嫁不出去，那你就麻烦了。这是一种方式。另一种越来越常见的方式，就是我所说的“认命”，意思是别无选择。因为在这个体系里，当你不遵守社会的某些基本规则时，你可能会陷入非常糟糕的境地：付不起房租、
78:01
of society you may end up in very bad situation in terms of paying your rent going on with your life having a regular job that determines everything else that happens in life so ultimately since alternatives to the existing order are not very visible since what used to be Party politics has become two different versions of the same form of life and nomination well then people are discouraged in terms of the any possibility to change their life so they go into the intimate like their private life they go into try to make my life in a that at least I have some pleasure of existence with my friends my love my family my work but only as long as you keep it within in your individual existence and projects you will not find obstacles if you try for instance what I we just discussed for instance if you don't want your life to be known completely known in every detail you have to become a much that person in this society imagine that you don't want to do to pay with credit cards well because by the
过不下去、找不到一份稳定的工作——而工作决定了人生中的其他一切。所以最终，既然现有秩序之外的替代方案并不那么显而易见，既然过去的政党政治已经变成同一种生活方式和支配形式的两个版本，人们就对改变自己生活的任何可能性感到灰心。于是他们退回到私密的、私人的生活里，试图在其中过好日子——至少让我和朋友、爱人、家人以及工作之间还有一些存在的乐趣。但只要你把这一切限制在个人的生存和个人的计划之内，你就不会遇到障碍。可如果你要尝试别的，比如我们刚才讨论的那些——如果你不希望自己的生活被彻底知晓、每个细节都被知道，那你在这个社会里就得变成一个非常边缘的人。想象一下，你不想用信用卡付款——顺便说一句，信用卡是我们隐私流失最重要的
79:29
way but critical is the most important element of loss of privacy that we have through your credit card everything is known because then is connected to everything else so try to try to have a life without a critical eye I can tell you people who can do it drug traffickers and professional criminals they don't use credit cards they pay cash however they can work in terms of cash because they are not afraid that someone taking the cash from them in the street so that's the critical matter the critical matter is that there are certain norms of society that you have to abide by these norms or then you will be marginalized as long as things are okay meaning that you have a life which is not dramatic then then it's alright but if you at any moment whether it's a financial crisis and economic crisis and job crisis or simply the incapacity to accept stupidity in your daily life in terms of what happens in the school or in the office or anywhere at that point any disinfectant behavior becomes stigmatized and then you start having
渠道，通过你的信用卡，一切都被知道了，因为它和其他所有东西都连在一起。所以试试看，试着过没有信用卡的生活。我可以告诉你们，能做到这一点的是谁：毒品贩子和职业罪犯。他们不用信用卡，他们付现金。不过他们之所以能用现金运作，是因为他们不怕有人在街上把现金抢走。所以关键就在这里：社会上存在某些规范，你必须遵守这些规范，否则你就会被边缘化。只要一切还算顺利——也就是说你的生活没出什么大问题——那还好，可一旦在某个时刻，无论是金融危机、经济危机、就业危机，还是你单纯无法忍受日常生活中的愚蠢，比如学校里、办公室里或者任何地方发生的事，到那个时候，任何不合群的行为都会被
80:51
the series of gestures that poison your life so you better stay quiet and behave that's what I mean and that's how five his shape in the mind and this is reproduced in the mass media this is reproduced in the schools this is reproduced in institutions this is the normalization of life is through all the systems of communication that ultimately define what is good what is bad what is dangerous what is standard so one effect of power is resignation is what resignation yeah fundamentally fail but how can we be active citizens participate have a normal social life with a credit card and not resignate well the general experience in society is that people accept resignation as the less evil until they cannot take it anymore and so that's why in terms of now talking about some kind of political neuroscience there are two key emotions that shape human behavior most important fear most important emotion safe in human behavior is fear we are the most important one we law we all move for life in terms of fear being afraid of this of this of this of this fear that
污名化，接着你的生活就会开始被一连串的小动作所毒害。所以你最好安静点、守规矩点。这就是我的意思，这就是权力如何塑造头脑，而这一切在大众媒体中被复制，在学校里被复制，在各种机构中被复制。生活的规范化，是通过所有这些传播系统实现的，它们最终定义了什么是好、什么是坏、什么是危险、什么是正常。所以权力的一个效果就是“认命”，什么是认命？从根本上说就是放弃。但我们怎样才能既做积极的公民、参与社会、过正常的社会生活、还用着信用卡，同时又不认命呢？嗯，社会中普遍的经验是，人们把认命当作两害相权取其轻，直到他们再也忍不下去。所以从某种政治神经科学的角度来说，有两种关键情绪塑造着人的行为。最重要的是恐惧——塑造人类行为最重要的情绪就是恐惧。我们一生中很多行动都出于恐惧：怕这个、怕那个、怕
82:16
nothing but happens to us that's one they and the antidote against fear it's already another muscle which is not and is known as outrage meaning when you can not take it anymore and then you explode so that's why my book is from outrage to hope because then the third emotion is when you project the different life which is hope so the sequin is you are afraid and therefore you don't move you don't do anything you accept whatever at one point things are so unbearable that you explode can be individual can be social can be at the school can be and your job can be in society at large and then from there this explosion is communicated through communication networks to others and then what is an individual experience becomes a social experience through the act of communication and that that leads to the deliberation of other possibilities which induce hope which is the potent positive emotion to transcend your current state of life and this is where social movements come in exactly okay a quick and a very tricky question from the audience
有什么不好的事落到我们头上，这是其一。而对抗恐惧的解药是另一种情绪，叫做愤怒，意思是当你再也忍不了的时候，你就爆发了。这就是为什么我的书叫《愤怒与希望之间》——因为接下来第三种情绪，是当你构想出一种不同的生活时，那就是希望。所以顺序是这样的：你害怕，于是你不动，你什么也不做，你接受一切；直到某个时刻，事情变得太难以忍受，你就爆发了。这可以是个人的，也可以是社会性的，可以发生在学校、在工作中，也可以在整个社会层面。然后从那里开始，这种爆发通过传播网络传递给其他人，于是原本是个人的经验，就通过传播行为变成了社会的经验。而这又引出对其他可能性的共同商议，从而催生希望——希望是那种能让你超越当下生活状态的强大正面情绪。而这正是社会运动登场的地方。没错。好，观众提出一个既简短又棘手的问题：
13互联网与民主、理论之争
83:39
is the internet beneficial for or a threat to democracy what is the internet beneficial or is it a threat to democracy internet depends internet depends of what we call democracy ebuy democracy we call the reproduction of the existing institutions without deliberation or challenge from the citizens internet ism is a threat to powers that be in every country you know I have been so many times in commissions of different governments it is used in the European Union the United Nations cetera about the Internet policy and the first question the government representatives as always is how can we control the Internet and when I say difficult as the cobra's that try to do it and you cannot is like controlling electricity internet is the basis of the entire information communication system in our societies and therefore they are not interested anymore in doing anything about the Internet in other words governments do not like the Internet they generally I'm talking in general of course there are exceptions such as I said but why not because
互联网对民主是有益的，还是一种威胁？互联网对民主是有益的，还是一种威胁？互联网嘛，要看情况，要看我们把什么叫做民主。如果我们所说的民主，是在没有公民商议或质疑的情况下复制既有制度，那么互联网在每个国家都是对当权者的威胁。你知道，我曾多次参加不同政府的委员会，它被用在……欧盟、联合国等等讨论互联网政策，政府代表提出的第一个问题永远都是：我们怎样才能控制互联网。我说这很难，是因为想这么做的人都做不到，这就像想控制电力一样。互联网是我们社会中整个信息传播系统的基础，因此他们已经不再有兴趣对互联网做什么了。换句话说，政府并不喜欢互联网。总体上说——我说的是普遍情况，当然也有例外，就像我刚才说的——但为什么呢？因为
85:01
governments are based in the terms in terms of their power on the capacity to control information on communication and internet actually removes much of the control of communication from the hands of government institutions and every time that they they can they use a protecting national security for instance to curtail Internet freedom before and for instance in the 1990s with Clinton in the United States they use they tried to use what everybody has used a child pornography of course we are all indignant about child pornography so they tried to use child pornography as a way to develop a number of controls over the Internet well one of the examples of what I was telling you before but the judicial protection of freedom in that particular case in the United States the act of what was called the act of decency in the internet by Clinton a Democrat and Liberal Democrat it was actually struck down by the federal courts in a sentence that was quite interesting in terms of the language and the federal court of appeals canceled the law as an attempt
政府的权力基础在于控制信息和传播的能力，而互联网实际上把很大一部分传播控制权从政府机构手中拿走了。所以只要一有机会，他们就会拿保护国家安全当理由，比如说，来限制互联网自由。比如上世纪九十年代，在美国克林顿时期，他们试图利用一个人人都用过的理由——儿童色情。当然我们都对儿童色情深恶痛绝，所以他们试图以儿童色情为由，建立一系列对互联网的管控。这也正是我前面讲到的一个例子，不过在那个特定案例中，司法对自由的保护起了作用。在美国，克林顿——一位民主党人、自由派民主党人——推动的所谓《互联网体面法案》，实际上被联邦法院推翻了。判决书的措辞相当有意思，联邦上诉法院废除了这项法律，认为它试图
86:27
to curtail freedom of expression and added yes is true that much of the sphere of expression in the Internet is chaos but citizens have a constitutional right to chaos which i think is an interesting notion so to a large extent the government's the largest and governors would like to divide internet between the useful internet education business etcetera and the free expression of everything in the internet which is in the essence of the internet culture and that's a debate in society should we be free of communicating even if this creates many uncontrolled expressions for instance to take clear example sexism that is full of sexist so should then should cut off the internet well the bad news is that even if we wanted we cannot there are some critical voices here one says where is the theory the other one says why didn't you talk about society about about society and oh yeah very legitimate and the other one says that these are phenomena that have been described fifty years ago why do we see no theoretical advancement why is signs so populist all right so
限制言论自由，并且还补充说：是的，互联网上的表达空间在很大程度上确实是一片混乱，但公民享有宪法赋予的制造混乱的权利。我觉得这个说法很有意思。所以在很大程度上，各国政府都希望把互联网一分为二：一边是有用的互联网——教育、商业等等，另一边是在互联网上自由表达一切，而后者恰恰是互联网文化的精髓。这也是社会上的一场辩论：我们是否应该拥有自由传播的权利，哪怕这会产生大量不受控制的言论？举个明显的例子，性别歧视——网上充斥着性别歧视，那我们是不是就该把互联网关掉？坏消息是，就算我们想关也关不掉。现场有一些批评的声音，一个说：理论在哪里？另一个说：你为什么不谈社会、谈谈社会呢？嗯，很有道理。还有一个说：这些现象五十年前就已经被描述过了，为什么我们看不到理论上的进展？为什么这种论述这么民粹？好的，
88:00
that really very important question well I talk about society because that's my job and I'm a social scientist and I try to understand the procedure of society I'm not a noise I'm trying to study and I have been trying to study the interaction between new technological forms and social processes of every kind but about the theory I actually I don't do theory I try I try to do research which means understanding real social processes the world of course we need some theoretical tools but I don't do theory for the sake of theory I try to understand and what I need some concepts I create the concepts or I borrow concepts sometimes and use these concepts to organize the information that leads to the understanding of a particular social process many of the theories for instance about social movements do not really understand what is the novelty of social movements when it's based on free network of communication much of what is the analysis of surveillance relates to all theories of surveillance and construction of the discourse that do
这确实是非常重要的问题。我谈社会，是因为那就是我的工作，我是社会科学家，我努力去理解社会的运作过程。我不是在制造噪音，我是在做研究。我一直试图研究新的技术形态与各类社会过程之间的互动。但说到理论，其实我不做理论。我努力去做研究，也就是理解真实的社会过程。当然我们需要一些理论工具，但我不为理论而理论。我是想去理解；当我需要某些概念时，我就创造概念，或者有时候借用别人的概念，然后用这些概念来组织信息，从而理解某个特定的社会过程。比如说，很多关于社会运动的理论，其实并没有真正理解当社会运动建立在自由的传播网络之上时，它的新颖之处在哪里。关于监控的分析，很多都还停留在旧有的监控理论和话语建构上，而这些
89:19
not really interact with the process we observe now I'm going to make one exception that is Foucault which I do think that it would be interested if he could see that beyond destitution that he mentioned as as well other panopticon's could be could be experiencing humankind but fundamentally I would say that if you would today I'd certainly did not use a theory percent but in my books I developed theory on the basis of my observation and on this particular topic I had a 600 pages book called communication power which at the end of the book on the basis of all the information and analysis Americanized and he produced proposes a theory of power which I call a network theory of power so I certainly today I did introduce much of your power although although I implicitly refer to the logic of neurosis critical in our type of society but to be more blunt I'm a very non typical social science in that say I don't think that facts per se explain anything we have to construct analytical frameworks but simply specific analytical frameworks to explain
跟我们现在观察到的过程并没有真正的互动。不过我要说一个例外，那就是福柯。我确实觉得，如果他能看到，除了他提到的那些机构之外，人类还可能经历其他形式的全景监狱，他会很感兴趣的。但从根本上说，我得承认，今天我确实没怎么讲理论。不过在我的书里，我是在自己观察的基础上发展理论的。就这个主题，我写过一本六百页的书，叫《传播力》。在书的最后，基于所有的信息和分析，他提出了一种权力理论，我称之为权力的网络理论。所以今天我确实没怎么展开讲权力理论，尽管我隐含地提到了我们这类社会中的一些核心逻辑。但说得更直白一点，我是个非常不典型的社会科学家，因为我不认为事实本身能解释任何东西，我们必须建构分析框架，而且是具体的分析框架，用来解释某个问题。这些框架如果能跟宏大理论、一般理论联系起来，也许挺好，
14不稳定的平衡与数字鸿沟
90:46
something if is possible to relate to grand theory and to general theory maybe but that not my personal interest my personal interest is to understand the world as it works because what I would like is that people and use my analysis to change it let's talk about power and encounter power there are some questions here from you one question is would you suggest that there is a balance between power and counter power as you gave examples for and another question is does the digital age make counter power more effective more effective mm-hmm well the balance is always unstable institutions are what I call crystallized power that is power relationships that at one point in history were dominant and constructed a constitution state laws that create the framework for human behavior so power is is traditionalized these divisions are an expression of power but not only of power were also stood users as the expression of the resistance to this power for instance the most typical example is not just the logic of capital and
但那不是我个人的兴趣所在。我个人的兴趣是理解这个世界实际如何运作，因为我希望的是，人们能用我的分析去改变它。我们来谈谈权力与反权力吧，这里有一些你们提的问题。一个问题是：你是否认为在你举的那些例子中，权力与反权力之间存在一种平衡？另一个问题是：数字时代是否让反权力变得更有效？更有效，嗯。平衡永远是不稳定的。制度就是我所说的结晶化的权力，也就是在历史上某个时刻占据主导地位的权力关系，它们构建了宪法、国家和法律，为人类行为设定了框架。所以权力被制度化了，这些制度是权力的一种表现，但不只是权力的表现，它们同时也是对这种权力的抵抗的表现。比如说，最典型的例子不只是资本和商业利益的逻辑，也包括工人阶级斗争的逻辑，
92:06
business interest it's also the logic of the working-classes struggles that developed for many decades and ultimately created the welfare state workers unions workers rights etcetera is both things at the same time but it never ends every time that there is an economic crisis the main attempt is to cut down the wages on the with the idea that this will increase the profits and the economy will work because profit will be increased so it's always an unstable matter women rights women rights again thirty years ago were almost entirely ignored in many many ways the feminist movement and the women move in general in many countries in most countries have completely changed the consciousness of women and therefore the women condition in many ways so this has changed in terms of legislation in terms of appointments of women to positions of power in terms of what is taught in the schools in terms of their gender relationship at all levels of society but at the same time the reaction in many cases is violence against women
这种斗争持续了几十年，最终催生了福利国家、工会、劳工权利等等。它同时是这两种东西的产物，但这个过程永远不会结束。每次出现经济危机，主要的做法都是削减工资，理由是这样能提高利润，经济就能运转起来，因为利润会增加。所以这永远是个不稳定的问题。女性权利也是一样，三十年前女性权利在很多方面几乎是被完全忽视的。女权运动，以及更广义上的妇女运动，在很多国家、在大多数国家，已经彻底改变了女性的意识，从而在很多方面改变了女性的处境。这体现在立法上、在女性被任命到权力位置上、在学校教的内容上、在社会各个层面的性别关系上。但与此同时，很多情况下的反弹就是针对女性的暴力，而在很多国家、很多
93:18
which is not prosecuted with too much energy in many countries and in many instances so it's constantly is a constant struggle to reinstate the women rights that we're Conquer decades ago so that for me is an example that the situation is never completely stabilized are we making progress toward more equal rights in every aspect depends depends on countries depends on issues what was the stigmatization of homosexuals right to marriage for instance years ago now has been normalized in some societies but not in many others and the stigma and discrimination continues to work against homosexuals against transsexuals and in the entire society so again there is a constant struggle to the fed new frontiers of human rights and at the same time a constant attempt to establish instruments of discrimination or pleasure the most important thing in Europe these days is enough obeah the hatred of people who are different apparently different in culture or ethnic terms the hatred of people who try desperately to make a new life in
情况下，这类暴力并没有被大力追究。所以这是一场持续不断的斗争，要重新捍卫我们几十年前争取到的女性权利。所以对我来说，这个例子说明局面从来不会彻底稳定下来。我们在各方面的权利平等上是否在进步？这要看国家，要看具体议题。比如对同性恋者的污名化、结婚的权利，多年前是那样，如今在一些社会已经正常化了，但在很多其他社会并没有，而针对同性恋者、跨性别者的污名和歧视在整个社会中依然存在。所以这又是一场持续的斗争，一方面要开拓人权的新边界，另一方面又不断有人试图建立歧视的工具，甚至以此为乐。如今欧洲最重要的问题就是仇外——仇恨那些不一样的人，那些在文化上或族裔上看起来不一样的人；仇恨那些拼命想在富裕的欧洲开始新生活的人。这是一项在实践中被否定的
94:37
the context of rich affluent Europe well this is human right which is being denied in practice under the pressure of certain segments of the population so this struggle never ends there to question there's a question in Catalan by the way which I cannot read I'm going to pass it on to you afterwards to say if you want to change language let's change there's a basically fundamental questions are the non digital citizens powerless this is one question because we were talking about the 4.5 billion people being online and the other what what happens to the others and the other question is what do we have a free choice in a digital world very good question really well first of all I was talking about regular Internet users in terms of the now in terms of connectivity I insist that not necessarily through internet but in terms of connectivity everybody is at this point everybody with some exceptions is connected if we have 7 billion numbers of mobile phones in practice of which half are so-called smart phones right they the other thing
人权，是在某些人群的压力之下被否定的。所以这场斗争永远不会结束。这里还有个问题，是用加泰罗尼亚语提的，顺便说一句我读不了，我待会儿把它交给你。如果你想换种语言，我们就换。这里有一些很根本的问题：非数字化的公民是否是无力的？这是一个问题，因为我们刚才谈到有四十五亿人在线，那么另一个问题是其他人怎么办？还有一个问题是：在数字世界里我们是否有自由选择？非常好的问题。首先，我刚才讲的是常规的互联网用户。就连接性而言——我要强调不一定是通过互联网，而是就连接性而言——到现在为止，除了少数例外，每个人都是连接着的。我们现在有七十亿部手机，其中大约一半是所谓的智能手机。另一件事是，就互联网的使用而言，最大的鸿沟已经不再是
96:09
is in terms of in terms of these uses of the Internet the big divide is not anymore access or not access the big divide is because literally at this point the large majority of people have access to internet and this also is almost saturation in many countries and those were not connected to their homes like in many African latin-american countries they're connected to internet cafes schools workplaces etc the most important divide in the actual use of internet business is H is H a large proportion of people who are over 60 let's say don't practice the Internet in developing countries in places like Germany or the United States or England certainly also they are Internet users but in most cases in the these billions that are still missing most of it is not linked to lack of possible connectivity is lack is fundamentally age and this is I always say when I will be gone my generation will be gone will be no problem of digital divide in terms of internet use it will be a problem of other problems than access you know one
有没有接入。最大的鸿沟不是这个了，因为到现在为止，绝大多数人都能上网，在很多国家这已经接近饱和了。那些家里没有联网的人，比如在很多非洲和拉美国家，他们通过网吧、学校、工作场所等等上网。在实际的互联网使用中，最重要的鸿沟是年龄——很大一部分六十岁以上的人，比如说在发展中国家，是不上网的。而在德国、美国或英国这样的地方，这个年龄段当然也有很多互联网用户。但在大多数情况下，那些仍然没有上网的几十亿人，大部分并不是因为没有可能的连接条件，根本上是因为年龄。所以我总说，等我这一代人离开之后，就互联网使用而言，数字鸿沟的问题就不存在了，剩下的会是接入以外的其他问题。关于这一点，有一件很重要的事：最重要的鸿沟其实是文化和
97:37
important thing about this is that the most significant divide is the cultural and educational divide because the moment we are all connected to the Internet the ability to know what to do with this connection how to access resources how to use these resources to develop your own life your own project which is ultimately education this is what becomes the most important divide so what Internet does it reproduces and expands the most significant divide that has been all over history education the level of education determines what people can do or not with Internet and we have a studies in the schools that show that children from poor families you introduce internet in the school these children do even worse children of middle class families with Internet in the school they do much better why because they have the cultural resources to actually use the internet for anything they want while the poor children with no background of Education and their families they ultimately use it for games for playing without any access not only to education
教育的鸿沟。因为一旦我们都连上了互联网，能不能知道用这个连接做什么、怎么获取资源、怎么用这些资源来发展自己的人生、自己的项目——这归根到底就是教育，这才是最重要的鸿沟。所以互联网所做的，是复制并放大了贯穿整个历史的最重要的鸿沟：教育。教育水平决定了人们能用互联网做什么、不能做什么。我们在学校做过研究，结果显示，来自贫困家庭的孩子，你把互联网引入学校，这些孩子的表现反而更差；而中产阶级家庭的孩子，学校有了互联网，他们的表现好得多。为什么？因为他们有文化资源，能真正把互联网用在他们想做的任何事情上；而贫困家庭的孩子，他们和他们的家庭都没有教育背景，最后就只是拿来玩游戏，不但接触不到教育，也接触不到更广阔的信息世界的探索。所以如果鸿沟是年龄，
99:02
but to a broader exploration of the wall of information so if the divide is age for example it's not the axis because that was that there was one question here that said is the struggle for power power different and the global north and the global south and by what I listen to you right now you would say no it's not no the let's say the the most important difference there is in terms of the quality of the connection the quality of the access not as we used to say in terms of the capacity to access the internet the grow-out south the large majority of the population has access to Internet but what quality of access and what to do with this access is what is different from the highly developed countries in which the education system allows people to understand and process information you said that education is the answer and one question here refers to that and the question goes so who provides the education in principle the schools in every society at the institutions that provide the education
比方说，而不是接入的话——这里有一个问题问道：全球北方和全球南方的权力斗争是否不同？从我刚才听你讲的来看，你会说不，不一样吗？不。我们这么说吧，最重要的差别在于连接的质量、接入的质量，而不是像我们过去说的那样，在于能不能接入互联网。在全球南方，绝大多数人口是能上网的，但接入的质量如何、用这种接入能做什么，这才是与高度发达国家不同的地方——在那些国家，教育体系让人们有能力理解和处理信息。你说教育就是答案，这里有一个问题跟这个有关，问题是：那么谁来提供教育？原则上是每个社会的学校，是那些提供教育的机构。
100:16
the problem is that schools are still based on a very old pedagogy not only technology pedagogy in which are determined on the basis of the authority of the teacher and the programs that are marked by educational bureaucracies rather than by the geography that internet would allow which is the ability for children to develop their own ideas and their own explorations guided and supported by the teachers and and the issue is that the freedom of exploration is not part of most of the programs of the educational system but that is where the problem is we did in Catalonia we did a comprehensive study all the primary and secondary schools and what we found is that the school system was such that teachers at home would use the Internet children at home would use the Internet but not in the school because it was not part not only the technical part but the the use of Internet in the school was not made possible by the type of organization both institutional and intellectual in terms of the content of
问题在于，学校仍然建立在一套非常陈旧的教学法之上——不只是技术，而是教学法本身，它是以教师的权威和教育官僚机构规定的课程为基础的，而不是互联网所能带来的那种教学法，也就是让孩子在教师的引导和支持下发展自己的想法、进行自己的探索。问题在于，这种探索的自由并不在教育体系的大多数课程之内，问题就出在这儿。我们在加泰罗尼亚做过一项覆盖所有小学和中学的全面研究，我们发现，学校系统的状况是：老师在家里会用互联网，孩子在家里也会用互联网，但在学校里不用。因为这不只是技术层面的问题，而是学校里的互联网使用，被那种组织方式——无论是制度上的还是知识层面上的，就课程内容而言——变得不可能。
15社会黏合剂、未来与欧洲的危机
101:37
the other programs I have a very simple question we're talking about power and counter power social movements negotiation negotiating power so what is it that keeps us as a social and digital society together what is the kind of glue between us in a digital age Oh simple question they fundamentally the sharing of values the sharing of values and the tolerance to share these values in other words if we have different systems of valuation life different systems between what produces equality or not in society if we do not agree on some fundamental principles sharing these principles and making sure that everybody except the idea that are being translated into practice then there is a breakdown of the basic social solidarity for instance the European Union is largely disintegrating the most important thing is that the European Union when everything went all right and was no major crisis well people accepted some solidarity mechanism let's taking the typical example Germans helping Greek but when things are different when the the issue is that
我有一个很简单的问题。我们一直在谈权力与反权力、社会运动、谈判、协商权力，那么是什么把我们作为一个社会性的、数字化的社会维系在一起？在数字时代，我们之间的黏合剂是什么？哦，简单的问题。从根本上说，是价值观的共享，价值观的共享，以及分享这些价值观所需要的包容。换句话说，如果我们对生活有不同的价值体系，对社会中什么造成平等、什么不造成平等有不同的看法，如果我们无法在一些根本原则上达成一致、共享这些原则，并确保每个人都接受这些原则被落实到实践中，那么基本的社会团结就会瓦解。比如说，欧盟正在很大程度上瓦解。最关键的一点是，当一切顺利、没有重大危机的时候，人们是接受某种团结机制的，举个典型的例子，德国人帮助希腊人。但当情况不同了，当问题变成
103:18
there is costly sources then people who are not like us don't deserve support and therefore the mechanism of support help and solidarity break down well what it's easy to observe between Germany and Greece is also within each country within Greece with in Germany when situation is such that people need support they only they only support those who they consider to be like themselves and that's when a major issue here is that this the rule that could apply to very heavy ethnically socially homogeneous cohesive societies but it doesn't work in multicultural multi class multiracial societies which are most of the European societies nowadays and therefore they the ability to accept common codes of behavior is being challenged by the practice of social inequality in Germany is better in that sense but overall the entire European countries like the United States are reaching staggering levels of economic and social inequality and therefore this dilutes social cohesion because of the idea that everybody agrees on some basic principles is betrayed by the
资源变得紧张时，那些跟我们不一样的人就不配得到支持，于是支持、帮助和团结的机制就崩溃了。在德国和希腊之间容易观察到的现象，在每个国家内部也是一样的——在希腊内部、在德国内部，当情况变成人们需要支持的时候，他们只支持那些他们认为跟自己一样的人。这里的一个主要问题是，这条规则也许适用于族裔上、社会上高度同质、高度凝聚的社会，但它在多元文化、多阶层、多种族的社会里行不通，而这正是如今大多数欧洲社会的样子。因此，接受共同行为准则的能力，正受到社会不平等现实的挑战。德国在这方面算是好一些，但总体而言，整个欧洲国家，还有美国，正在达到令人震惊的经济和社会不平等水平，这就稀释了社会凝聚力。因为“大家都认同某些基本原则”这个观念，被这样的
104:51
observation that those who have power and resources have increasingly more power and resources and do not care about the weaker segments of the population so it's a process of social fragmentation which is amplified by the internet and that's my point in relation to the internet because if because through the internet everybody has access to information and has access to what's happening and can't debate and can organize discussions in the social networks about the reasons for the inequality and the injustice in society so in a society in which there is consensus internet reinforces consensus in a society in which there's increasing inequality and increasing cleavages between the population and increasing conflict internet amplifies this conflict and therefore contributes to this integrating social cohesion okay we have like five minutes left and they're like 120 questions left so let's choose some of them there's one question about post digital society how could a post digital society look Mad Max or Blade
现实所背叛：那些拥有权力和资源的人，权力和资源越来越多，而且根本不关心人口中更弱势的群体。所以这是一个社会碎片化的过程，而互联网放大了这个过程。这就是我关于互联网想说的重点，因为通过互联网，每个人都能获取信息，都能了解正在发生什么，都能辩论，都能在社交网络上组织讨论，讨论社会中不平等和不公正的原因。所以在一个有共识的社会里，互联网强化共识；而在一个不平等加剧、人群之间裂痕加深、冲突加剧的社会里，互联网会放大这种冲突，从而加剧社会凝聚力的瓦解。好，我们还剩大约五分钟，但还有大概一百二十个问题，所以我们挑几个吧。有一个关于后数字社会的问题：后数字社会会是什么样子？《疯狂麦克斯》还是《银翼
106:16
Runner hmm I don't remember the film's as you well can you repeat how could a post digital society look and it refers through the two films Mad Max or Blade Runner and I don't remember them too well so we can't we just have to cut all this kind of reference so what is the poster to the world like well I don't I never frankly I never talk about the future because it's methodological is impossible seriously but I don't want to escape the question in terms of the which is which kind of futures can be imagined I would not call it post digital because digital is a system of communication which is there to stay forever will be deeper and more complex and more extensive forms of digital communication lasts as we cannot say that what happen in a post electricity society we will have electricity that manages everything but the issue I think it's not what it's about what which kind of new forms of social existence are being formed well the easy answer is the new institutions and new forms of social existence if those that will be constructed and
杀手》？嗯，这两部电影我记得不太清了。你能再说一遍吗？后数字社会会是什么样子，它提到了两部电影，《疯狂麦克斯》和《银翼杀手》，我记得不太清楚，所以我们干脆把这类指涉都略过。那么后数字的世界是什么样的？坦白说，我从来不谈未来，因为从方法论上讲这是不可能的，真的。但我不想回避这个问题，就“可以想象哪些未来”而言：我不会把它叫做“后数字”，因为数字是一套传播系统，它会一直存在下去，只会出现更深入、更复杂、更广泛的数字传播形式。就像我们不能说“后电力社会”会怎么样一样，我们会一直有电力来驱动一切。但我认为问题不在于此，而在于哪些新的社会存在形式正在形成。简单的答案是：新的制度和新的社会存在形式，将由人类在他们自己的社会中
107:39
developed by the humans in terms of their own societies and that ultimately will be determined in terms of power relationships in terms of who and the negotiations between those who exercise power and those criticized country power as always has been in history but if we see now in following this methodology if we see the current connections could we observe is I mean the more we develop our technological capacity the more we observe a huge gap between our technological power and our capacity to live together and our capacity to tolerate each other and our capacity to correct in justices and to correct inequalities institutionally speaking and so we are moving we have been moving in the last ten years and we continue to move toward in an increasingly violent conflicted world among other things because we are all related in the planet now the so-called globalization is simply a networking of all the global melrose in every domain of life we are together but we are separated by religion by ethnicity by institutions by democratic institutions by class by
去建构和发展，而这最终取决于权力关系，取决于谁掌握权力，取决于行使权力的人和行使反权力的人之间的谈判，历史上一直都是如此。但如果我们按照这套方法来看现在，如果我们看当下的种种联系，我们能观察到的是：我们的技术能力发展得越强，我们就越能看到我们的技术力量与我们共同生活的能力之间存在巨大的落差——我们彼此包容的能力，我们纠正不公的能力。从制度层面来说的不平等，所以我们正在走向——过去十年我们一直在走向，并且还会继续走向一个越来越暴力的、冲突不断的世界。原因之一是，我们如今在这个星球上都彼此相连，所谓的全球化其实就是把全球各个领域的一切都联成了网络。在生活的每一个领域我们都紧密相连，但我们又被宗教、被族群、被制度、被民主制度、被阶级、被
109:06
levels of development and we do not have the mechanism to negotiate these dramatic conflicts because the nation-states are defenders of their own interests and not offenders of the overall interests of humanity and the United Nations has never been anything else but the expression of the power of the network of the nation-states themselves so the gap between our technological capacity and our institutional and moral capacity to manage the problems is increasing and the worst possible scenario is how to unleash this incredible technological power for instance transforming human nature per se and the weak ethical and institutional capacity to move toward a common well-being rather toward the specific interest of groups who are the most powerful this is the issue so at the end let's come back to the focus of the series which is a European focus and we talked about it in the introduction in the talk do you think we should develop a specifically European perspective on digital society and what
发展水平所割裂，而我们并没有一套机制去化解这些剧烈的冲突，因为民族国家维护的是它们自身的利益，而不是人类整体的利益；联合国从来就不过是民族国家网络本身权力的一种表达而已。所以，我们的技术能力与我们管理这些问题的制度能力、道德能力之间的鸿沟正在不断扩大，而最糟糕的情形就是：如何释放这种惊人的技术力量——比如改造人性本身——与此同时，推动我们走向共同福祉、而非走向最强势群体特殊利益的伦理与制度能力却如此薄弱，这就是问题所在。那么最后，让我们回到这个系列的主题，也就是一个欧洲的视角。我们在开场和演讲中谈到过：你认为我们应该发展一种专门属于欧洲的数字社会视角吗？它
110:31
could it be made of no and frankly I to start with I don't think is such a thing as Europe to start saying that's my latest book published a week ago is called the crisis of Europe and shows why the European Union is disintegrating breaks it is only the beginning the idea of a united Europe of a sharing project review was a wonderful idea that I always supported as a personal citizen but what we observed is the contrary is the fracturing of Europe and the inability of Europe to act as one single entity among other thing because we do not have a common European identity what has been common in Europe let be serious the only thing common in Europe has been killing each other for several hundred years including the 20th century that's sad observation but so the idea of creating a European project requires developing a common practice a common practice of being Europeans we think like share labor market share cultural education listed users share media systems but the only thing we have common Europe is what we have with the rest of the world which
可以由什么构成？不应该。坦白说，首先，我并不认为存在所谓的“欧洲”这样一个东西。先这么说吧，我一周前出版的最新一本书就叫《欧洲的危机》，书中说明了为什么欧盟正在瓦解。英国脱欧只是个开始。一个统一的欧洲、一个共享的欧洲计划这个理念是个很美好的想法，作为一个公民个人我一直支持它，但我们观察到的却是相反的情形：欧洲的碎片化，以及欧洲无法作为一个单一实体行动。原因之一是，我们没有共同的欧洲认同。说实话，欧洲共同拥有的是什么？欧洲唯一共同拥有的东西，就是几百年来互相残杀，包括二十世纪在内。这是个令人难过的观察，但正因如此，要创造一个欧洲计划，就需要发展出一种共同的实践，一种“做欧洲人”的共同实践。比如我们要共享劳动力市场、共享文化教育、共享媒体系统。而我们在欧洲唯一共同拥有的东西，恰恰也是我们与世界其他地方共同拥有的，
111:58
is precisely the uses of Internet the European Union that's hell I mean some what a joint Internet policy so some forms of economic and technological policy can be European that that would be the perspective but not the digital society because the digital society in an extremely diverse social situation as is the case of Europe has different expression and different forms but Europe does have some commonality in terms of the Internet related digital policies which commonality there is a much stronger emphasis on the public interest than for instance in the United States there is somewhat more protection of privacy and of citizens rights in Europe so there are a number of things in the values of Europe which are widely accepted in the population which make it for a more humane and decent form of entering a new technological age no question about that and that would be some to some extent the superiority of Europe over other areas and nations in the world so in that sense a European perspective is European it is the
那就是互联网的使用方式。欧盟嘛，见鬼——我是说，某种共同的互联网政策，某些形式的经济和技术政策可以是欧洲层面的，那才是可能的视角，但数字社会不行。因为在欧洲这样极其多样化的社会状况下，数字社会有着不同的表现形式和不同的形态。不过在与互联网相关的数字政策方面，欧洲确实有一些共通之处。是哪些共通之处呢？比如相比美国，欧洲对公共利益的强调要强烈得多；在欧洲，隐私和公民权利也多少得到更多保护。所以欧洲的价值观里有不少东西是被民众广泛接受的，这使得欧洲能以一种更人道、更体面的方式进入新的技术时代，这一点毫无疑问，而这在某种程度上也是欧洲相对于世界上其他地区和国家的优越之处。所以从这个意义上说，一种欧洲视角之所以是欧洲的，就在于它
113:23
attempt to have a control of the technological transformation closer to the values and interest of people's lives ok so you're an optimist and pessimist at the same time that life we have come to our last part of the evening and this last part is called the quest and it's a questionnaire and it will be the same questionnaire for every guest of the series and of course we hope for different answers from everyone or no answer or no answer at all that's possible as well and short answers of course and this is how it works I start the sentence and you finish it no I don't play games it's it's science it's a questionnaire yeah okay man you made the questionnaire but they can't okay we will see if you don't like the question you don't answer if you like it you answer okay no because I don't like the method you like the method huh what is your method the make of this would you just express okay particularly we thought preap with a previous warning hmm yeah that's what voting should be some nice twenty any
试图让技术变革受到某种控制，使之更贴近人们生活中的价值观和利益。好的，所以你同时既是乐观主义者又是悲观主义者。那么，我们来到了今晚的最后一个环节，这个环节叫“提问”，是一份问卷，这份问卷对本系列的每一位嘉宾都是一样的。当然我们希望每个人给出不同的答案，或者不回答，完全不回答也是可以的。当然答案要简短。规则是这样的：我起个头，你把这句话补完。不，我不玩游戏。这是科学，这是一份问卷。是啊，好吧，问卷是你做的，可他们不能……好吧，我们试试看：如果你不喜欢这个问题，你就不回答；喜欢的话，你就回答。好吗？不行，因为我不喜欢这种方式。你喜欢这种方式吗？那你的方式是什么？这样做的意义……你就直说吧。好吧，我们特意事先做了准备，也提前打过招呼。嗯，是啊，投票就该是这样，来点轻松的二十个……
114:48
attention later no no that should be in this petition continuous no I hippies spontaneous the whole evening that's you yeah but you are not being spontaneous that is your questions are not a spontaneous so why should give a spontaneous answers to non spontaneous questions that's a good question first with you it's gonna make better the game I may ask you the questions and then you respond and then we discover my god this is like let's try the first one okay because this is a fun one if I had the chance to reinvent the internet I would these are problem that's a question that they raised for myself or I have never had this place we entering that the realm of fantasy and power and you have the power to do everything you want within that question I don't so okay I'd imagine so thank you sorry about that because I have great respect for you of that top gimmicks know that you're a wonderful person and moderator and everything but I can have a drink together rather than thanks for this Christmas Thank You medium for your work
后面再说注意力的事。不不，那应该是在这个……持续不断的……不，我更喜欢即兴发挥。整个晚上你都是这样，是啊，但你并不是即兴的，也就是说你的问题不是即兴的，那我为什么要对不即兴的问题给出即兴的回答呢？这问题问得好。不如先从你开始，这样游戏会更好玩。我可以问你问题，然后你来回答，然后我们就会发现……我的天，这就像……我们先试第一个吧。好，因为这个挺有意思的：如果我有机会重新发明互联网，我会……这是个问题，是我曾为自己提出过的问题吗？我从来没有过这种机会。我们这是进入了幻想的领域，仿佛你有权力在那个问题里做任何你想做的事，可我没有，所以……好吧，我想象一下。那么谢谢你，很抱歉，因为我非常尊重你，那些小花招……你要知道，你是个很棒的人，也是很棒的主持人，一切都好，但我们不如一起喝一杯，而不是……谢谢你这个圣诞节。谢谢你的工作。
116:14
we of course want to thank you that oh yes of course why not we are happy you're here and we wanted to give you present from Berlin and since we are not exactly a wine region and we cannot compete with great Spanish wines this is a leader like foodie package little things nice things to eat from Berlin and thank you very much for being here and coming thank you very much for your understanding
我们当然也要感谢你。哦对，当然，为什么不呢。我们很高兴你能来，我们想送你一份来自柏林的礼物。既然我们这里并不算什么葡萄酒产区，也没法跟出色的西班牙葡萄酒相比，这是一份柏林的美食礼包，一些好吃的小东西。非常感谢你今天到场，感谢你的到来，也非常感谢你的理解。
116:54
so you are very much invited to stay here for a drink and the next chance to get more of the European perspective is the 30th of January our next guest will be Christophe no Berger a communicational scientist and professor and we would be very happy to see you again and right now because we have so many questions left you asked of course you can stay for a drink outside there at the panorama bar and have a real life chat with us and with manuel castells thank you very much muchas gracias
非常欢迎大家留下来喝一杯。下一次了解更多欧洲视角的机会是1月30日，我们的下一位嘉宾将是克里斯托夫·诺伊贝格尔，一位传播学学者和教授。我们很期待再次见到各位。现在，因为我们还有很多没来得及问的问题，当然大家可以留下来，到外面的全景酒吧喝一杯，跟我们以及曼纽尔·卡斯特进行一次真实的面对面交流。非常感谢，muchas gracias。
视频总结 · 一句话概括与核心要点
一句话概括
卡斯特尔在柏林讲座中论证：数字社会的核心仍是权力与反权力的永恒博弈——国家借全球监控、资本借数据商品化控制信息，而公民借加密、举报、公民新闻和网络化社会运动进行反制，互联网本身只是社会的镜子，教育与价值共识才是决定性变量。
核心要点
- 权力关系是社会的DNA，且有权力必有反权力：卡斯特尔将权力分为强制型（韦伯式国家暴力垄断）与说服型（福柯/葛兰西式塑造心智），二者皆依赖信息与传播；掌权者控制传播则塑造被统治者的"顺从/认命"，异见者只有通过与同类沟通、"重新编程"传播过程才能改变现状。
- 信息已几乎全面数字化，星球被完全联网：其学生Martin Hilbert发表于《Science》的研究测算，2010年全球92%的信息已数字化，如今约95–96%；全球有40亿互联网用户、70亿无线号码（总人口75亿），成年人中50%拥有智能手机。
- 国家逻辑=全球监控官僚体系：9·11后美国NSA、英国GCHQ、德国BND等获得空前授权并彼此联网；因法律禁止监听本国公民，各国便"法国监视德国、德国监视法国，再交换情报"；美国FISA法庭20年来从未否决过NSA的任何一项申请，"国家安全"成为削减自由的万能借口。
- 资本逻辑=将人变成数据：互联网公司的商业模式是"你不是在付费，你的数据就是货币"；Google隐私政策实际保留获取姓名、地址、位置、邮件、搜索历史、购买记录乃至邮件内容的权利；Sun公司CEO McNealy早在1999年就说"数字时代没有隐私，接受吧"。
- 传播空前去中心化，信息却空前集中：正因为人人随时与所有人沟通，国家与企业才能轻易收割全部信息；物联网将把万亿计的网络以秘密算法自我编程，进一步脱离公众控制。
- 国家与资本两种逻辑既合作又矛盾：NSA早期依赖Google、Apple、Facebook的技术；但若用户因隐私恐慌转向加密，企业的数据商业模式将被摧毁，因此Apple、扎克伯格等有时抵制政府索取数据，加密之战是公民自保的根本战场。
- 反权力有多条现实路径：欧盟的法律保护强于美国、中国；EFF持续诉讼；绿色和平以飞艇标出NSA在犹他州Bluffdale的秘密数据中心；Tor在2011年埃及断网5天期间维持通信；斯诺登因预知前任举报者的下场而预先规划出逃；WikiLeaks公开政府与企业隐匿信息；人人手持手机拍摄警察暴力等构成"反向监控"，政客如今活在被曝光的恐惧中。
- 网络化社会运动改变了政治：占领运动、西班牙15M等由"愤怒"而非意识形态触发，通过互联网+占领城市空间形成"自治空间"；后续效应包括西班牙Podemos获约20%选票、智利学生运动领袖组建新党首战超20%（领袖太年轻甚至需请友人代为参选）；15M获70%西班牙民众支持，占领华尔街获1/3美国人支持；桑德斯曾亲身参与占领运动，民调显示能击败特朗普，却被民主党机器排挤。
- 互联网只是社会的镜子：引用技术史家Kranzberg——技术既非好也非坏，也非中立；中国可以抓"信使"却拦不住"信息"；同一自由也被特朗普阵营和德国新纳粹用于组织种族/性别歧视动员；对后真相、机器人账号、假新闻，技术无法根治，唯一解药是受过教育、能主动纠正信息的公民。
- 真正的数字鸿沟是年龄与教育，而非接入：60岁以上人群是主要未使用群体；加泰罗尼亚全境中小学调查显示，贫困家庭孩子接入网络后成绩反而更差，中产孩子则显著提升——互联网复制并放大了教育鸿沟；学校仍受制于权威式教学与官僚课程。
结论与值得注意的细节
- 结论：新技术环境下的仍是最古老的斗争——对抗国家滥权与垄断资本剥削，捍卫人类的自由与尊严；技术能力与人类共处、容忍、纠正不公的制度/道德能力之间的鸿沟正不断扩大，世界因此愈发冲突化。
- 政治神经科学式解释：恐惧使人认命、不敢行动；忍无可忍时爆发为愤怒；愤怒经网络传播成为集体经验，进而产生希望——这就是《愤怒与希望的网络》的逻辑。
- 社会凝聚的粘合剂是共享价值与容忍；在共识社会互联网强化共识，在不平等加剧的社会互联网放大冲突、瓦解凝聚力（如德国与希腊的团结机制在危机中崩溃）。
- 对"欧洲视角"持怀疑：新书《欧洲的危机》认为欧盟正在解体，英国脱欧只是开始，欧洲缺乏共同身份，"几百年来唯一的共同点是互相残杀"；但承认欧洲在公共利益导向与隐私保护上优于美国，这是欧洲进入技术时代更人道的一面。
- 逃离"数字尾气"的唯一办法是不用社交网络、搜索引擎、信用卡——即彻底脱离社会常规，现实中只有毒贩和职业罪犯才这样生活；美国联邦法院曾以"公民享有宪法赋予的'混乱权'"为由推翻克林顿的《通信规范法》。
- 花絮：卡斯特尔拒绝谈论未来（"方法论上不可能"），并当场拒绝了主持人的填空问卷游戏，理由是"不该用自发的回答去应对不自发的问题"；他还提到常用于社会运动的加密工具Telegram由移居德国的俄罗斯黑客开发。
核心句型 · 9
1. wherever there is X, there is always Y
“Wherever there is power there is always counter power”
用「凡有 X 处必有 Y」表达一对不可分割的关系，语气笃定，适合提出理论命题。仿写：Wherever there is surveillance, there is also counter-surveillance.
2. X is only as … as it is used for …
“Technologies of freedom are only as free as they are used for freedom”
「X 的程度取决于它被怎样使用」，用同一形容词的比较结构造成回环，强调效果由使用决定。仿写：A tool is only as useful as the hands that use it.
3. not X but Y
“This is not an analysis of domination … is always an analysis of domination counter domination”
先否定常见理解再给出自己的定义，是学术表达中澄清立场的常用结构。可与 in the classic tradition 等限定语搭配。
4. precisely because …
“Precisely because we are a highly communicative society”
用 precisely 强化因果，常用于指出悖论：看似矛盾的两件事恰恰互为条件。仿写：It fails precisely because it succeeds.
5. X is neither A nor B, nor is it C
“Technology is neither good or bad neither it is neutral”
三重否定排除所有简单标签，迫使听者接受更复杂的判断。注意规范写法为 neither…nor…, nor is it…。
6. if you are X … but if you are Y …
“If you are the messenger that's important but if you are the message you can go on”
用对称的条件句对比两种身份/情形，制造格言式效果。适合提炼观点的收束句。
7. in a society in which …, X does A; in a society in which …, X does B
“In a society in which there is consensus internet reinforces consensus in a society in which there's increasing inequality … internet amplifies this conflict”
平行的条件—结果句说明同一因素在不同语境中的相反作用，是「放大器」论证的典型表达。
8. the gap between X and Y is increasing
“The gap between our technological capacity and our institutional and moral capacity to manage the problems is increasing”
用「X 与 Y 之间的差距在扩大」表达失衡诊断，X、Y 常为并列的抽象名词短语，适合总结性论断。
9. let alone …
“There is more protection in the European Union than in … let alone in China”
「更不用说……」，用于在已有比较后追加一个更极端的例子，强化程度。前文通常含否定或比较。
生词精讲 · 133 · 按出现顺序
tackles
/ˈtækəlz/
v.
1:46
着手处理、应对（问题）
draw a broader picture
phr.
1:46
勾勒更宏观的图景
anecdotes
/ˈænɪkdoʊts/
n.
3:15
轶事；零散的个案（与系统分析相对）
cultivate
/ˈkʌltɪveɪt/
v.
3:15
培育、培养（视角、关系等）
public discourse
phr.
3:15
公共话语、公共讨论
multipliers
/ˈmʌltɪplaɪərz/
n.
4:41
传播者、倍增者（此处指把教育内容扩散出去的中介人群，如教师）
media literacy
phr.
4:41
媒介素养
goes hand in hand with
phr.
4:41
与……相伴而生、密切相关
prerequisites
/priˈrekwəzɪts/
n.
6:05
前提条件
cross-cutting
/ˈkrɔːs kʌtɪŋ/
adj.
6:05
跨领域的、贯穿性的（议题）
agency
/ˈeɪdʒənsi/
n.
6:05
能动性；行动主体的作用（社会学术语）
autonomous
/ɔːˈtɑːnəməs/
adj.
6:05
自主的、不受外力支配的
let's be blunt
phr.
7:23
直说吧、不客气地说
cross-fertilization
/ˌkrɔːs ˌfɜːrtələˈzeɪʃən/
n.
8:44
（思想、领域间的）相互启发、交叉借鉴
digestible
/daɪˈdʒestəbəl/
adj.
8:44
易于消化理解的
trilogy
/ˈtrɪlədʒi/
n.
9:22
三部曲
professor emeritus
/prəˈfesər ɪˈmerɪtəs/
n.
10:49
荣休教授
resilience
/rɪˈzɪliəns/
n.
12:22
韧性、复原力
bureaucracies
/bjʊˈrɑːkrəsiz/
n.
12:22
官僚体制
obsession
/əbˈseʃən/
n.
15:45
执念、萦绕不去的关注点
foundational
/faʊnˈdeɪʃənəl/
adj.
15:45
根基性的、基础性的
domination
/ˌdɑːmɪˈneɪʃən/
n.
17:29
支配、统治
voice their dissent
phr.
17:29
表达异议
relentless
/rɪˈlentləs/
adj.
17:29
永不停歇的、不懈的
coercive
/koʊˈɜːrsɪv/
adj.
19:09
强制性的、胁迫的
persuasive
/pərˈsweɪsɪv/
adj.
19:09
说服性的、有说服力的
monopoly
/məˈnɑːpəli/
n.
19:09
垄断
elicit
/ɪˈlɪsɪt/
v.
19:09
引出、诱发（反应、同意）
resignation
/ˌrezɪɡˈneɪʃən/
n.
19:09
认命、听天由命（本文关键概念，非「辞职」义）
hegemony
/hɪˈdʒeməni/
n.
19:09
霸权（葛兰西术语：通过文化共识实现的统治）
protagonists
/prəˈtæɡənɪsts/
n.
20:50
主角、主导者
dialectical
/ˌdaɪəˈlektɪkəl/
adj.
22:26
辩证的
paradigms
/ˈpærədaɪmz/
n.
22:26
范式
pamphlets
/ˈpæmflɪts/
n.
22:26
小册子、传单
metaphysical
/ˌmetəˈfɪzɪkəl/
adj.
22:26
形而上的
advent
/ˈædvent/
n.
23:49
（重要事物的）到来、出现
ubiquitous
/juːˈbɪkwɪtəs/
adj.
23:49
无处不在的
recombine
/ˌriːkəmˈbaɪn/
v.
25:28
重新组合
cornerstones
/ˈkɔːrnərstoʊnz/
n.
27:06
基石
surveillance
/sərˈveɪləns/
n.
28:42
监控、监视
commodifying
/kəˈmɑːdɪfaɪɪŋ/
v.
28:42
商品化（把非商品之物变为可买卖的商品）
deliberately
/dɪˈlɪbərətli/
adv.
30:21
刻意地、有意地
spare capacity
phr.
30:21
闲置产能、富余算力
digital exhaust
phr.
31:49
数字尾气：数字活动留下的副产品数据
comprehensive
/ˌkɑːmprɪˈhensɪv/
adj.
31:49
全面的、无所不包的
quantum leap
phr.
33:16
飞跃、突变式进展（原文误拼作 Kuantan lead）
panopticon
/pæˈnɑːptɪkɑːn/
n.
34:45
全景敞视监狱（边沁设计、福柯引申为无处不在的监视）
judicial
/dʒuːˈdɪʃəl/
adj.
34:45
司法的
commodification
/kəˌmɑːdɪfɪˈkeɪʃən/
n.
34:45
商品化
currency
/ˈkɜːrənsi/
n.
34:45
货币；此处比喻「你的数据就是你支付的货币」
decentralization
/diːˌsentrəlaɪˈzeɪʃən/
n.
36:18
去中心化
get over it
phr.
37:44
接受现实、别再纠结
reserves the right
phr.
37:44
保留……的权利（法律/政策用语）
protocols
/ˈproʊtəkɔːlz/
n.
39:13
协议（网络通信规则）
encryption
/ɪnˈkrɪpʃən/
n.
40:42
加密
backlash
/ˈbæklæʃ/
n.
42:14
强烈反弹、反噬
culinary
/ˈkʌlɪneri/
adj.
42:14
烹饪的、饮食的
a needle in a haystack
phr.
43:31
大海捞针
asymmetry
/ˌeɪˈsɪmətri/
n.
44:56
不对称
obliterated
/əˈblɪtəreɪtɪd/
v.
44:56
彻底摧毁、抹除
Orwellian
/ɔːrˈweliən/
adj.
44:56
奥威尔式的（极权监控的）
breaching
/ˈbriːtʃɪŋ/
v.
46:27
违反、侵犯（隐私、协议）
curtail
/kərˈteɪl/
v.
47:53
削减、限制（自由、权力）
clandestine
/klænˈdestɪn/
adj.
49:37
秘密的、暗中的
repository
/rɪˈpɑːzətɔːri/
n.
49:37
储存库、数据仓库
blimp
/blɪmp/
n.
49:37
小型飞艇
uproar
/ˈʌprɔːr/
n.
49:37
轩然大波、哗然
whistleblowers
/ˈwɪsəlbloʊərz/
n.
51:10
告密者、吹哨人
denounce
/dɪˈnaʊns/
v.
51:10
公开谴责、揭发
persecution
/ˌpɜːrsɪˈkjuːʃən/
n.
51:10
迫害
confiscation
/ˌkɑːnfɪˈskeɪʃən/
n.
51:10
没收、充公
political asylum
phr.
52:40
政治庇护
intercepted
/ˌɪntərˈseptɪd/
v.
52:40
拦截
police brutality
phr.
54:08
警察暴力
denunciation
/dɪˌnʌnsiˈeɪʃən/
n.
54:08
公开揭发、谴责
spontaneous uprising
phr.
55:43
自发的起义
outrage
/ˈaʊtreɪdʒ/
n.
55:43
义愤、愤慨（卡斯特情绪理论的关键词）
bypass
/ˈbaɪpæs/
v.
57:08
绕开、避开
downplayed
/ˌdaʊnˈpleɪd/
v.
57:08
贬低、淡化（重要性）
ripple effects
phr.
57:08
涟漪效应、连锁反应
deliberation
/dɪˌlɪbəˈreɪʃən/
n.
58:21
商议、审议
seize power
phr.
58:21
夺取政权
arbiters
/ˈɑːrbɪtərz/
n.
59:39
仲裁者、决定性力量
mobilization
/ˌmoʊbələˈzeɪʃən/
n.
60:57
动员
hostility
/hɑːˈstɪləti/
n.
60:57
敌意
establishment
/ɪˈstæblɪʃmənt/
n.
62:27
建制派、当权集团
crushed
/krʌʃt/
v.
62:27
碾碎、粉碎
popular vote
phr.
62:27
普选票（与选举人票相对）
prisoner of
phr.
63:50
受制于、成为……的囚徒
disintermediation
/ˌdɪsˌɪntərˌmiːdiˈeɪʃən/
n.
65:14
去中介化
in normative terms
phr.
66:35
从规范（应然）角度讲
neither good or bad neither it is neutral
phr.
68:06
既非好也非坏，也不中立（克兰兹伯格第一定律）
cacophony
/kəˈkɑːfəni/
n.
69:28
刺耳的杂音；此处指信息的嘈杂混乱
post truth
phr.
69:28
后真相
exploitation
/ˌeksplɔɪˈteɪʃən/
n.
70:57
剥削
oppression
/əˈpreʃən/
n.
70:57
压迫
repression
/rɪˈpreʃən/
n.
76:35
压制、镇压
abide by
phr.
76:35
遵守（规则、规范）
marginalized
/ˈmɑːrdʒɪnəlaɪzd/
v.
79:29
被边缘化
stigmatized
/ˈstɪɡmətaɪzd/
v.
79:29
被污名化
normalization
/ˌnɔːrmələˈzeɪʃən/
n.
80:51
规范化、常态化
the less evil
phr.
80:51
两害相权取其轻（常作 the lesser evil）
antidote
/ˈæntɪdoʊt/
n.
82:16
解药、对抗手段
transcend
/trænˈsend/
v.
82:16
超越
powers that be
phr.
83:39
当权者、掌权势力（习语）
indignant
/ɪnˈdɪɡnənt/
adj.
85:01
义愤填膺的
struck down
phr.
85:01
（法院）裁定无效、推翻（法律）
for the sake of
phr.
88:00
为了……本身、出于……的目的
implicitly
/ɪmˈplɪsɪtli/
adv.
89:19
隐含地、不言明地
crystallized
/ˈkrɪstəlaɪzd/
adj.
90:46
结晶化的、固化的
welfare state
phr.
92:06
福利国家
prosecuted
/ˈprɑːsɪkjuːtɪd/
v.
93:18
起诉、追究
reinstate
/ˌriːɪnˈsteɪt/
v.
93:18
恢复、重新确立
xenophobia
/ˌzenəˈfoʊbiə/
n.
93:18
仇外、排外心理（原文误拼作 enough obeah）
affluent
/ˈæfluənt/
adj.
93:18
富裕的
saturation
/ˌsætʃəˈreɪʃən/
n.
96:09
饱和
cultural resources
phr.
97:37
文化资源、文化资本
pedagogy
/ˈpedəɡɑːdʒi/
n.
100:16
教学法
glue
/ɡluː/
n.
101:37
黏合剂；比喻维系社会的纽带
solidarity
/ˌsɑːlɪˈdærəti/
n.
101:37
团结、互助
homogeneous
/ˌhoʊməˈdʒiːniəs/
adj.
103:18
同质的
cohesive
/koʊˈhiːsɪv/
adj.
103:18
有凝聚力的
staggering
/ˈstæɡərɪŋ/
adj.
103:18
惊人的、令人震惊的
dilutes
/daɪˈluːts/
v.
103:18
稀释、削弱
fragmentation
/ˌfræɡmenˈteɪʃən/
n.
104:51
碎片化
cleavages
/ˈkliːvɪdʒɪz/
n.
104:51
（社会）裂痕、分野
methodologically
/ˌmeθədəˈlɑːdʒɪkli/
adv.
106:16
在方法论上
unleash
/ʌnˈliːʃ/
v.
109:06
释放、放出
common well-being
phr.
109:06
共同福祉
disintegrating
/dɪsˈɪntɪɡreɪtɪŋ/
v.
110:31
瓦解、解体
fracturing
/ˈfræktʃərɪŋ/
n.
110:31
断裂、分裂
humane
/hjuːˈmeɪn/
adj.
111:58
人道的
spontaneous
/spɑːnˈteɪniəs/
adj.
113:23
即兴的、自发的
理解自测 · 11 题 · 是真懂了，还是以为自己懂
1. 卡斯特区分了哪两种基本的权力形态？各自的理论来源是什么？
强制性权力（对身体的权力）与说服性权力（对心灵的权力）。前者对应韦伯所说的国家对暴力的垄断；后者是塑造心灵、诱导被支配者同意或至少「认命」的能力，理论来源是福柯的话语/规训分析与葛兰西的文化霸权概念。卡斯特在讲座第三部分（第13段）指出，两种权力都可以被抵抗，而说服性权力尤其依赖信息与传播，这一判断为整场讲座聚焦传播技术奠定了基础。
2. 讲座中引用了哪些关键数据来说明「完全连接的星球」？
卡斯特引用其学生 Martin Hilbert 发表于《科学》的研究：全球信息已有92%数字化，如今约95–96%；全球75亿人口中有40亿互联网用户、70亿无线通信号码（强调是号码而非设备）；全球50%成年人拥有智能手机。这些数据出现在讲座第16–18段，用于论证数字传播已成为一切社会活动的基础媒介，因而权力与反权力的斗争必然在这一环境中展开。
3. 什么是「数字尾气」？它为什么构成大规模监控的基础？
「数字尾气」指人们日常数字活动留下的副产品数据：信用卡、通话、搜索记录、身份证号、金融交易、邮件、社交网络互动等。卡斯特在第21段指出，关键不在于单项数据，而在于一切互联，因此这些数据可以被当作一个系统整体处理、检索和组织。这使得9·11后被赋予特权的监控机构（NSA、GCHQ、BND 等）能够建立起「规模惊人的全景敞视监狱」，并通过跨国交换绕开禁止监视本国公民的法律。
4. 卡斯特为什么说斯诺登落脚莫斯科不能证明他一开始就是间谍？
他给出了一条因果链：斯诺登知道此前的告密者一生被毁，因此事先规划退路；他原本申请拉美国家（尤其是厄瓜多尔）的政治庇护；但从香港到莫斯科后，任何被怀疑载有他的航班——包括玻利维亚总统莫拉莱斯的专机——都会在欧洲领空被拦截搜查，他因此无法移动。卡斯特承认后期俄罗斯影响可能显著，但强调这不是他反抗的起点。此例出现在第34–35段，用于说明「反监控」行动者付出的代价。
5. 「传播去中心化」与「信息集中化」为何被卡斯特称为一个决定性悖论？
因为两者不是对立而是互为条件。互联网让人人都能与所有人自由传播，这是极度的去中心化；但正因为人们每天把一切都传播出去，国家和大公司能够毫无阻力地采集全部信息，形成极度的集中。卡斯特在第24段用「precisely because we are a highly communicative society」强调：自由本身生产了监控的原料。这一悖论解释了为什么「技术是自由的」与「监控无处不在」可以同时成立，也为后文讨论加密与商业模式的矛盾做了铺垫。
6. 国家的权力逻辑与资本的商品逻辑有何不同？这种差异为什么给反抗留下了空间？
国家逻辑是「要找针就得先有整个草垛」——尽可能占有全部信息以维持安全与秩序；资本逻辑是把用户的生活转化为可出售的数据以获利。两者合作（企业向监控机构提供技术、机构给企业好处），但并不一致：如果用户因隐私恐慌转向加密，企业的数据商业模式就会被反噬，因此苹果等公司在某些时刻选择抵制政府。卡斯特在第27–29段指出，这种矛盾意味着控制体系不是铁板一块，加密之战因而成为「根本性的较量」。
7. 卡斯特如何回应「网络化社会运动不了了之、什么也没产生」的批评？
他的核心论点是：社会运动的作用在于改变人们头脑中的意识，政治效果往往在三到五年后才显现。证据包括：西班牙5·15运动催生的 Podemos 掌握约20%选票；智利2011年学生运动领袖组建新党在首次总统选举中得票逾20%，成为关键仲裁者；占领华尔街获得约三分之一民众支持、只有20%敌视；桑德斯作为占领运动脉络中的候选人本可击败特朗普。这些案例出现在第38–43段，构成从「自主性空间」到制度变革的推理链。
8. 为什么卡斯特认为「互联网是社会的镜子」而非独立的好或坏的力量？
他引用克兰兹伯格第一定律「技术既不好也不坏，也不中立」，指出互联网的效果是不确定的，由社会使用方式决定。证据是双向的：同一自由传播系统既支撑了占领运动，也被特朗普阵营和德国新纳粹用于种族主义、性别歧视动员。在对谈中（第73段）他进一步提出「放大器」模型：共识社会中互联网强化共识，分裂社会中放大冲突。因此他把假新闻与后真相的解决方案落回教育——有教养的公民主动纠正信息，而非技术管控。
9. 恐惧、愤怒、希望这一情绪序列如何解释「认命」与社会运动的关系？
卡斯特在对谈第56–57段提出：恐惧是塑造人类行为最重要的情绪，它让人不动、接受一切，这就是「认命」；当处境难以忍受时，愤怒作为恐惧的解药让人爆发；爆发通过传播网络从个人经验变为社会经验，经过商议引出对不同生活的构想，即希望。这一链条既解释了为什么大多数人在日常中选择遵守规范（否则会被边缘化，如不用信用卡的只有罪犯），也解释了网络化社会运动为何总是由愤怒而非意识形态触发。
10. 如果有人反驳说「互联网导致了社会极化」，卡斯特会如何回应？
他会拒绝把互联网当作原因，而将其定位为放大器。推理链：社会凝聚力的黏合剂是共享价值观与包容；当不平等达到「惊人水平」，掌权者不再关心弱势群体时，「大家认同基本原则」的信念被现实背叛，团结机制崩溃（德国与希腊的例子）；互联网只是让每个人都能看到并讨论这种不公，因而在分裂社会中放大冲突。这与他一贯反对技术决定论的立场一致：要减少极化，应处理不平等与教育，而非责怪或关闭互联网——他也指出后者「就算想做也做不到」。
11. 卡斯特对「欧洲视角」的质疑，放到中国或美国的语境下还成立吗？
他的论点是：不存在统一的「欧洲数字社会」，因为没有共同的欧洲认同，几百年的共同经历只有互相残杀；但存在欧洲共同的数字政策特征——比美国更强调公共利益、更保护隐私与公民权利。迁移到美国：美国有相对统一的国家认同与联邦法律，「数字社会」在社会层面更可整体讨论，但其政策特征是商业逻辑主导，恰是卡斯特用来对照欧洲的反例。迁移到中国：国家认同强，但卡斯特在第45段指出中国控制体系可抓「信使」却拦不住「信息」，说明他的框架关注的是政策与价值取向的差异，而非地理单位本身；因此他会认为任何地区的「视角」都应落在可比较的政策价值上，而非笼统的文化身份。
下载便签
手机：长按图片保存
← 上一期 · REC_022Terry Tao "How to think like a mathematician" presented by the UCLA Curtis Center
下一期 · REC_024 →Capitalism vs. Socialism: A Soho Forum Debate
苏菲拉底
THE SOPHIE LAB · ASK THE BEST MINDS THE BIG QUESTIONS
内容仅供学习 · thesophielab.com