比爾蓋茨畢業留言

you graduates came to harvard at a different time. you know more about the world's inequities than the classes that came before. in your years here, i hope you've had a chance to think about how - in this age of accelerating technology - we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.

在座的各位同學，你們是在與我不同的時代來到哈佛的。你們比以前的學生，更多地瞭解世界是怎樣的不平等。在你們的哈佛求學過程中，我希望你們已經思考過一個問題，那就是在這個新技術加速發展的時代，我們怎樣最終應對這種不平等，以及我們怎樣來解決這個問題。

imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause - and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. where would you spend it?

爲了討論的方便，請想象一下，假如你每個星期可以捐獻一些時間、每個月可以捐獻一些錢----你希望這些時間和金錢，可以用到對拯救生命和改善人類生活有最大作用的地方。你會選擇什麼地方？

for melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.

對melinda（注：蓋茨的妻子）和我來說，這也是我們面臨的問題：我們如何能將我們擁有的資源發揮出最大的作用。

during our discussions on this question, melinda and i read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis b, yellow fever. one disease i had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year - none of them in the united states.

在討論過程中，melinda和我讀到了一篇文章，裏面說在那些貧窮的國家，每年有數百萬的兒童死於那些在美國早已不成問題的疾病。麻疹、瘧疾、肺炎、乙型肝炎、黃熱病、還有一種以前我從未聽說過的輪狀病毒，這些疾病每年導致50萬兒童死亡，但是在美國一例死亡病例也沒有。

we were shocked. we had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. but it did not. for under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren't being delivered.

我們被震驚了。我們想，如果幾百萬兒童正在死亡線上掙扎，而且他們是可以被挽救的，那麼世界理應將用藥物拯救他們作爲頭等大事。但是事實並非如此。那些價格還不到一美元的救命的藥劑，並沒有送到他們的手中。

if you believe that every life has equal value, it's revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. we said to ourselves: "this can't be true. but if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving."

如果你相信每個生命都是平等的，那麼當你發現某些生命被挽救了，而另一些生命被放棄了，你會感到無法接受。我們對自己說："事情不可能如此。如果這是真的，那麼它理應是我們努力的頭等大事。"

so we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. we asked: "how could the world let these children die?"

所以，我們用任何人都會想到的方式開始工作。我們問："這個世界怎麼可以眼睜睜看着這些孩子死去？"

the answer is simple, and harsh. the market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. so the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.

答案很簡單，也很令人難堪。在市場經濟中，拯救兒童是一項沒有利潤的工作，政府也不會提供補助。這些兒童之所以會死亡，是因爲他們的父母在經濟上沒有實力，在政治上沒有能力發出聲音。

but you and i have both.

但是，你們和我在經濟上有實力，在政治上能夠發出聲音。

we can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism - if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. we also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.

我們可以讓市場更好地爲窮人服務，如果我們能夠設計出一種更有創新性的資本主義制度----如果我們可以改變市場，讓更多的人可以獲得利潤，或者至少可以維持生活----那麼，這就可以幫到那些正在極端不平等的狀況中受苦的人們。我們還可以向全世界的政府施壓，要求他們將納稅人的錢，花到更符合納稅人價值觀的地方。

if we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. this task is open-ended. it can never be finished. but a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.

如果我們能夠找到這樣一種方法，既可以幫到窮人，又可以爲商人帶來利潤，爲政治家帶來選票，那麼我們就找到了一種減少世界性不平等的可持續的發展道路。這個任務是無限的。它不可能被完全完成，但是任何自覺地解決這個問題的嘗試，都將會改變這個世界。

i am optimistic that we can do this, but i talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. they say: "inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end - because people just ... don't ... care." i completely disagree.

在這個問題上，我是樂觀的。但是，我也遇到過那些感到絕望的懷疑主義者。他們說："不平等從人類誕生的第一天就存在，到人類滅亡的最後一天也將存在。----因爲人類對這個問題根本不在乎。"我完全不能同意這種觀點。

i believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.

我相信，問題不是我們不在乎，而是我們不知道怎麼做。

all of us here in this yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing - not because we didn't care, but because we didn't know what to do. if we had known how to help, we would have acted.

此刻在這個院子裏的所有人，生命中總有這樣或那樣的時刻，目睹人類的悲劇，感到萬分傷心。但是我們什麼也沒做，並非我們無動於衷，而是因爲我們不知道做什麼和怎麼做。如果我們知道如何做是有效的，那麼我們就會採取行動。

the barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.

改變世界的阻礙，並非人類的冷漠，而是世界實在太複雜。

to turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. but complexity blocks all three steps.

爲了將關心轉變爲行動，我們需要找到問題，發現解決辦法的方法，評估後果。但是世界的複雜性使得所有這些步驟都難於做到。

even with the advent of the internet and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. when an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. they promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.

即使有了互聯網和24小時直播的新聞臺，讓人們真正發現問題所在，仍然十分困難。當一架飛機墜毀了，官員們會立刻召開新聞發佈會，他們承諾進行調查、找到原因、防止將來再次發生類似事故。

but if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: "of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. we're determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent."

但是如果那些官員敢說真話，他們就會說："在今天這一天，全世界所有可以避免的死亡之中，只有0.5%的死者來自於這次空難。我們決心盡一切努力，調查這個0.5%的死亡原因。"

the bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.

顯然，更重要的問題不是這次空難，而是其他幾百萬可以預防的死亡事件。

we don't read much about these deaths. the media covers what's new - and millions of people dying is nothing new. so it stays in the background, where it's easier to ignore. but even when we do see it or read about it, it's difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. it's hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don't know how to help. and so we look away.

我們並沒有很多機會了解那些死亡事件。媒體總是報告新聞，幾百萬人將要死去並非新聞。如果沒有人報道，那麼這些事件就很容易被忽視。另一方面，即使我們確實目睹了事件本身或者看到了相關報道，我們也很難持續關注這些事件。看着他人受苦是令人痛苦的，何況問題又如此複雜，我們根本不知道如何去幫助他人。所以我們會將臉轉過去。

if we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.

就算我們真正發現了問題所在，也不過是邁出了第一步，接着還有第二步：那就是從複雜的事件中找到解決辦法。

finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. if we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks "how can i help?," then we can get action - and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. but complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares -- and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.

如果我們要讓關心落到實處，我們就必須找到解決辦法。如果我們有一個清晰的和可靠的答案，那麼當任何組織和個人發出疑問"如何我能提供幫助"的時候，我們就能採取行動。我們就能夠保證不浪費一丁點全世界人類對他人的關心。但是，世界的複雜性使得很難找到對全世界每一個有愛心的人都有效的行動方法，因此人類對他人的關心往往很難產生實際效果。

cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have -- whether it's something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.

從這個複雜的世界中找到解決辦法，可以分爲四個步驟：確定目標，找到最高效的方法，發現適用於這個方法的新技術，同時最聰明地利用現有的技術，不管它是複雜的藥物，還是最簡單的蚊帳。