Just a few minutes ago, I took this picture about 10 blocks from here. This is the Grand Cafe here in Oxford. I took this picture because this turns out to be the first coffeehouse to open in England in 1650. That's its great claim to fame, and I wanted to show it to you, not because I want to give you the kind of Starbucks tour of historic England, but rather because the English coffeehouse was crucial to the development and spread of one of the great intellectual flowerings of the last 500 years, what we now call the Enlightenment.
就在幾分鐘前，我在離這裡大約十條街的地方 拍了這張照片。 這是牛津這裡的大咖啡館。 我拍這張照片是因為它年代久遠 始建於1650年，是英國第一個 咖啡館 相當有名。 我想展示給你照片， 不是因為我想給你星巴克式的 英國曆史回顧， 而是因為 在過去500年間， 英國咖啡館對 所謂的啟蒙運動 發展和傳播 起到至關
And the coffeehouse played such a big role in the birth of the Enlightenment, in part, because of what people were drinking there. Because, before the spread of coffee and tea through British culture, what people drank -- both elite and mass folks drank -- day-in and day-out, from dawn until dusk was alcohol. Alcohol was the daytime beverage of choice. You would drink a little beer with breakfast and have a little wine at lunch, a little gin -- particularly around 1650 -- and top it off with a little beer and wine at the end of the day. That was the healthy choice -- right -- because the water wasn't safe to drink. And so, effectively until the rise of the coffeehouse, you had an entire population that was effectively drunk all day. And you can imagine what that would be like, right, in your own life -- and I know this is true of some of you -- if you were drinking all day, and then you switched from a depressant to a stimulant in your life, you would have better ideas. You would be sharper and more alert. And so it's not an accident that a great flowering of innovation happened as England switched to tea and coffee.
重要的 作用。 究其原因，部分是因為人在那裡喝的東西。 因為，在咖啡和茶在英國文化中 廣泛傳播前， 無論是精英與大眾 每天從黎明到黃昏 人們喝的是酒 酒是白天的首選飲料。 在1650年左右，早餐你會喝一點啤酒，午餐喝一點葡萄酒， 晚上來一點杜松子酒， 並在這一天結束時喝啤酒和葡萄酒。 那時水是不能飲用的， 因此酒是健康的選擇。 基本上，在咖啡館的興起前， 所有人整天 都醉醺醺的。 而你能想象你的生活會是什麼樣子， 我知道對於你們中的一些是真的 - 如果你喝了一整天， 然後放下這個抑制劑，改成別的使你興奮的飲料 你會更好的想法。 你會更清晰，更警覺。 所以當英格蘭人改喝茶和咖啡後 創新的興起就不是一個意外了
But the other thing that makes the coffeehouse important is the architecture of the space. It was a space where people would get together from different backgrounds, different fields of expertise, and share. It was a space, as Matt Ridley talked about, where ideas could have sex. This was their conjugal bed, in a sense -- ideas would get together there. And an astonishing number of innovations from this period have a coffeehouse somewhere in their story.
但是，其他的東西如咖啡館 空間結構也很重要。 在這裡，來自不同背景 不同專業領域的人們 分享想法。 如馬特雷德利談到， 在這裡，想法交織在一起。 在一定意義上，這是它們的夫妻床。 想法將聚在一起。 而這一時期的數量驚人的創新 發源於咖啡館。
I've been spending a lot of time thinking about coffeehouses for the last five years, because I've been kind of on this quest to investigate this question of where good ideas come from. What are the environments that lead to unusual levels of innovation, unusual levels of creativity? What's the kind of environmental -- what is the space of creativity? And what I've done is I've looked at both environments like the coffeehouse; I've looked at media environments, like the world wide web, that have been extraordinarily innovative; I've gone back to the history of the first cities; I've even gone to biological environments, like coral reefs and rainforests, that involve unusual levels of biological innovation; and what I've been looking for is shared patterns, kind of signature behavior that shows up again and again in all of these environments. Are there recurring patterns that we can learn from, that we can take and kind of apply to our own lives, or our own organizations, or our own environments to make them more creative and innovative? And I think I've found a few.
在過去的五年我花了很多 時間思考咖啡館， 因為我一直 試圖 找到好點子的來源。 哪些環境因素 導致不尋常水平的創新， 不尋常水平的創造？ 有什麼樣的環境 什麼是創造力的空間？ 而我所做的就是 我觀察環境，如咖啡館; 媒體環境，如萬維網 已經非常有創新性; 我又回過頭來看早期城市的歷史; 我還觀察了生物環境 如珊瑚礁和熱帶雨林， 那裡有超凡的生物創新; 我一直在尋找的是它們共通的模式 一種標誌性的行為 一次又一次顯示在這些環境中。 是否我們可以從這些不斷重複的模式中學到東西 進而可以應用於我們自己的生活， 或組織， 或環境，使他們更具有創造力和創新力？ 我想我已經找到了一些。
But what you have to do to make sense of this and to really understand these principles is you have to do away with a lot of the way in which our conventional metaphors and language steers us towards certain concepts of idea-creation. We have this very rich vocabulary to describe moments of inspiration. We have the kind of the flash of insight, the stroke of insight, we have epiphanies, we have "eureka!" moments, we have the lightbulb moments, right? All of these concepts, as kind of rhetorically florid as they are, share this basic assumption, which is that an idea is a single thing, it's something that happens often in a wonderful illuminating moment.
但是你為了 真正理解這些原則， 你必須做的是遠離 我們傳統的方式的隱喻和語言 引導我們 到某些想法產生的概念。 我們已有非常豐富的詞彙 來形容的靈感瞬間。 比如我們有閃光 洞悉， 頓悟，“我發現了！”瞬間， 我們有燈泡時刻，對嗎？ 所有這些概念， 作為一種華麗修辭， 分享一個基本假設， 那就是一想法是一個單一的事情， 靈感經常發生在 一個美妙的照亮時刻。
But in fact, what I would argue and what you really need to kind of begin with is this idea that an idea is a network on the most elemental level. I mean, this is what is happening inside your brain. An idea -- a new idea -- is a new network of neurons firing in sync with each other inside your brain. It's a new configuration that has never formed before. And the question is: how do you get your brain into environments where these new networks are going to be more likely to form? And it turns out that, in fact, the kind of network patterns of the outside world mimic a lot of the network patterns of the internal world of the human brain.
但事實上，我會說，首先你得理解 想法是一個網絡 最基本的就是一個網絡 它就是在你的大腦裡發生的事情。 一個想法，一個新的想法，是一種新的大腦神經元 互相同步放電的網絡 一個從來沒有形成過的新的配置。 而問題是：你如何將要你的大腦進入環境中， 更可能的形成這些新的網絡？ 而事實證明，對外部世界的網絡模式， 模仿了很多人腦的 內部世界的網絡。
So the metaphor I'd like the use I can take from a story of a great idea that's quite recent -- a lot more recent than the 1650s. A wonderful guy named Timothy Prestero, who has a company called ... an organization called Design That Matters. They decided to tackle this really pressing problem of, you know, the terrible problems we have with infant mortality rates in the developing world. One of the things that's very frustrating about this is that we know, by getting modern neonatal incubators into any context, if we can keep premature babies warm, basically -- it's very simple -- we can halve infant mortality rates in those environments. So, the technology is there. These are standard in all the industrialized worlds. The problem is, if you buy a $40,000 incubator, and you send it off to a mid-sized village in Africa, it will work great for a year or two years, and then something will go wrong and it will break, and it will remain broken forever, because you don't have a whole system of spare parts, and you don't have the on-the-ground expertise to fix this $40,000 piece of equipment. And so you end up having this problem where you spend all this money getting aid and all these advanced electronics to these countries, and then it ends up being useless.
所以，我想用一個偉大想法的 故事舉例， 是相當近期的- 比1650年代近得多。 有個人叫提摩太·普萊斯泰羅的人 他擁有一家名為設計關鍵的公司。 他們有一個非常迫切的問題來解決， 即發展中世界的嬰兒死亡率 較高的問題。 其中令人沮喪的東西是， 我們知道在任何情況下， 現代新生兒恆溫箱 保持早產兒溫暖，基本上 - 非常簡單地， 我們可以在這些環境裡使嬰兒死亡率減半。 因此，技術上是可行的。 這些是所有工業化世界的標準。 問題是，如果你買了4萬美元的保溫箱， 你把它送到 非洲的中型村莊， 它能正常工作一年，或兩年， 然後某件東西會出問題，機器將破損， 因為你沒有整個系統的備件， 它將永久破損， 並且你沒有當地專業人員來維修 這種4萬美元的設備。 所以你最終有這個問題，你把所有錢 用於獲得援助和運送這些先進的電子設備的錢到這些國家， 而它最終失去使用價值。
So what Prestero and his team decided to do is to look around and see: what are the abundant resources in these developing world contexts? And what they noticed was they don't have a lot of DVRs, they don't have a lot of microwaves, but they seem to do a pretty good job of keeping their cars on the road. There's a Toyota 4Runner on the street in all these places. They seem to have the expertise to keep cars working. So they started to think, "Could we build a neonatal incubator that's built entirely out of automobile parts?" And this is what they ended up coming with. It's called a "neonurture device." From the outside, it looks like a normal little thing you'd find in a modern, Western hospital. In the inside, it's all car parts. It's got a fan, it's got headlights for warmth, it's got door chimes for alarm -- it runs off a car battery. And so all you need is the spare parts from your Toyota and the ability to fix a headlight, and you can repair this thing. Now, that's a great idea, but what I'd like to say is that, in fact, this is a great metaphor for the way that ideas happen. We like to think our breakthrough ideas, you know, are like that $40,000, brand new incubator, state-of-the-art technology, but more often than not, they're cobbled together from whatever parts that happen to be around nearby.
那麼萊斯泰羅和他的團隊決定做的是研究： 在這些發展中世界的背景下，什麼資源 是豐富的？ 他們注意到的是那裡沒有很多的數字錄像機 沒有很多的微波爐， 但似乎他們的汽車保養得很好。 在這些地方，到處都有豐田的 越野車。 他們有養汽車的專業技能。 於是他們開始思考， “我們能不能做一個完全 是用汽車零部件組裝的新生兒恆溫箱？” 而這是他們最後想出的。 這就是霓虹育兒設備。 從外面看，它就像一個會在一個 現代化西方醫院找到的普通小東西。 在它裡面，全由汽車零部件組成。 它有一個風扇，有取暖燈， 有門報警鐘。 它靠一個汽車電池運行。 因此只要你有豐田汽車的零部件， 和修復大燈的技術， 你就可以修復它。 現在，這是一個好主意，但我想說的是，事實上， 它很好地隱喻了想法發生的方式。 我們喜歡認為我們突破性的想法，你知道， 就是這樣的4萬美元，全新的育兒箱， 有最先進的技術， 但往往不是，它們是由周圍 隨便什麼地方的零件拼湊起來的。
We take ideas from other people, from people we've learned from, from people we run into in the coffee shop, and we stitch them together into new forms and we create something new. That's really where innovation happens. And that means that we have to change some of our models of what innovation and deep thinking really looks like, right. I mean, this is one vision of it. Another is Newton and the apple, when Newton was at Cambridge. This is a statue from Oxford. You know, you're sitting there thinking a deep thought, and the apple falls from the tree, and you have the theory of gravity. In fact, the spaces that have historically led to innovation tend to look like this, right. This is Hogarth's famous painting of a kind of political dinner at a tavern, but this is what the coffee shops looked like back then. This is the kind of chaotic environment where ideas were likely to come together, where people were likely to have new, interesting, unpredictable collisions -- people from different backgrounds. So, if we're trying to build organizations that are more innovative, we have to build spaces that -- strangely enough -- look a little bit more like this. This is what your office should look like, is part of my message here.
我們從別人獲取想法， 從我們所研究的人身上，從我們在咖啡廳裡碰到的人 然後我們把它們融合成新的形式，來創造新的東西。 這才是創新發生的地方。 這意味著我們必須改變目前的真正的創新 和深入思考某些機制，是的。 我的意思是，這是一種觀念。 另一例子是在劍橋的牛頓和蘋果的故事。 這是在牛津的一座雕像。 你知道，當你坐在那裡深刻地思考， 這時蘋果從樹上墜落，於是你發現了重力理論。 事實上，曾經在歷史上產生創新發展的空間 往往是這樣的，沒錯。 這是荷加斯的一張酒館吃飯那種政治名畫， 但是這就是當時的咖啡館的樣子 在混亂的環境中， 想法有可能走到一起 來自不同背景的人很可能有 新的，有趣的，不可預測的碰撞。 因此，如果我們試圖建立更具有創意的組織， 我們要建設的空間，奇怪的是，看起來有點像這一點。 你的辦公室應是這樣子 這是我想表達的。
And one of the problems with this is that people are actually -- when you research this field -- people are notoriously unreliable, when they actually kind of self-report on where they have their own good ideas, or their history of their best ideas. And a few years ago, a wonderful researcher named Kevin Dunbar decided to go around and basically do the Big Brother approach to figuring out where good ideas come from. He went to a bunch of science labs around the world and videotaped everyone as they were doing every little bit of their job. So when they were sitting in front of the microscope, when they were talking to their colleague at the water cooler, and all these things. And he recorded all of these conversations and tried to figure out where the most important ideas, where they happened. And when we think about the classic image of the scientist in the lab, we have this image -- you know, they're pouring over the microscope, and they see something in the tissue sample. And "oh, eureka," they've got the idea.
當你研究這個領域， 而與此的問題之一是， 人們實際上是 眾所周知的不可靠， 他們有自己的好想法， 或者其歷史上的最好的想法，他們真正的 自我報告。 而在幾年前，一個研究員叫凱文·鄧巴 決定去 用大兄弟的方法找尋出 好主意的來源 他去了世界各地的科學實驗室， 給工作人員的 日常工作錄像。 當他們坐在顯微鏡前， 當他們和同事談論水冷卻器，以及其他東西。 他記錄了所有這些談話， 試圖找出在哪裡產生 最重要的想法。 在實驗室的科學家經典形象是， 他們是專注於顯微鏡， 觀察一些組織樣本。 “噢，我發現了！”他們有這個想法。
What happened actually when Dunbar kind of looked at the tape is that, in fact, almost all of the important breakthrough ideas did not happen alone in the lab, in front of the microscope. They happened at the conference table at the weekly lab meeting, when everybody got together and shared their kind of latest data and findings, oftentimes when people shared the mistakes they were having, the error, the noise in the signal they were discovering. And something about that environment -- and I've started calling it the "liquid network," where you have lots of different ideas that are together, different backgrounds, different interests, jostling with each other, bouncing off each other -- that environment is, in fact, the environment that leads to innovation.
實際上，鄧巴在磁帶觀察到， 幾乎所有的重要突破性的想法 並不僅僅發生在實驗室的顯微鏡的前面。 它們發生在每週的實驗室 會議桌上， 當大家聚在一起，分享他們的最新的數據和調查結果， 分享他們的錯誤， 偏差，他們發現信號的噪音。 還有環境的一些因素 我已經開始將其稱為“液態網絡” 當很多不同的想法在一起的時候 不同背景，不同的利益， 互相沖撞，互相反彈 其實， 是環境導致創新。
The other problem that people have is they like to condense their stories of innovation down to kind of shorter time frames. So they want to tell the story of the "eureka!" moment. They want to say, "There I was, I was standing there and I had it all suddenly clear in my head." But in fact, if you go back and look at the historical record, it turns out that a lot of important ideas have very long incubation periods -- I call this the "slow hunch." We've heard a lot recently about hunch and instinct and blink-like sudden moments of clarity, but in fact, a lot of great ideas linger on, sometimes for decades, in the back of people's minds. They have a feeling that there's an interesting problem, but they don't quite have the tools yet to discover them. They spend all this time working on certain problems, but there's another thing lingering there that they're interested in, but they can't quite solve.
另外一個問題是， 人們喜歡把他們的創新故事濃縮到 較短的時間框架。 因此，他們想告訴這個故事的“發現了！”時刻。 他們想說的是：“我站在那裡， 在我的腦子裡突然清楚有了它。” 但事實上，如果你回去看看歷史紀錄 事實證明，大量的重要思想 有很長的孕育期。 我稱它為“慢的預感”。 我們已經聽到了 很多關於最近預感和本能 明晰閃爍，像突然的時刻， 但事實上，有許多偉大的想法 揮之不去，有時在人們的心中 長達幾十年。 他們花這麼長的時間對某些問題的工作， 但還有另一個 揮之不去 的東西， 他們感興趣，但他們不能完全解決。
Darwin is a great example of this. Darwin himself, in his autobiography, tells the story of coming up with the idea for natural selection as a classic "eureka!" moment. He's in his study, it's October of 1838, and he's reading Malthus, actually, on population. And all of a sudden, the basic algorithm of natural selection kind of pops into his head and he says, "Ah, at last, I had a theory with which to work." That's in his autobiography. About a decade or two ago, a wonderful scholar named Howard Gruber went back and looked at Darwin's notebooks from this period. And Darwin kept these copious notebooks where he wrote down every little idea he had, every little hunch. And what Gruber found was that Darwin had the full theory of natural selection for months and months and months before he had his alleged epiphany, reading Malthus in October of 1838. There are passages where you can read it, and you think you're reading from a Darwin textbook, from the period before he has this epiphany. And so what you realize is that Darwin, in a sense, had the idea, he had the concept, but was unable of fully thinking it yet. And that is actually how great ideas often happen; they fade into view over long periods of time.
達爾文是一個很好的例子。 在他的自傳裡， 達爾文講述了 自然選擇的產生， 作為一個典型的“發現！”時刻。 1838年十月份的， 他在他的書房裡， 閱讀馬爾薩斯的人口論。 突然間， 自然選擇的基本算法在他腦海裡浮現， 他說：“哦，我終於有一個合理的理論了“。 這就是他的自傳中描述的。 大約十年或二十年前， 有個學者叫霍華德·格魯伯 他在流覽達爾文這一時期的筆記本 達爾文保留下豐富的筆記， 他寫下了他的每一點想法，每個小預感。 格魯伯發現，1838年10月 達爾文在閱讀馬爾薩斯著作 並頓悟數月之前， 已有了自然選擇的 充分理論。 你可以閱讀段落， 你以為你是從達爾文教科書閱讀， 從他有這個頓悟之前的一段期間。 你瞭解到，在某種意義上說， 達爾文有了想法，他有了概念， 但尚未完全思考透澈。 這實際上是偉大的思想經常發生， 它們進入視野消失了很長一段時間。
Now the challenge for all of us is: how do you create environments that allow these ideas to have this kind of long half-life, right? It's hard to go to your boss and say, "I have an excellent idea for our organization. It will be useful in 2020. Could you just give me some time to do that?" Now a couple of companies -- like Google -- they have innovation time off, 20 percent time, where, in a sense, those are hunch-cultivating mechanisms in an organization. But that's a key thing. And the other thing is to allow those hunches to connect with other people's hunches; that's what often happens. You have half of an idea, somebody else has the other half, and if you're in the right environment, they turn into something larger than the sum of their parts. So, in a sense, we often talk about the value of protecting intellectual property, you know, building barricades, having secretive R&D labs, patenting everything that we have, so that those ideas will remain valuable, and people will be incentivized to come up with more ideas, and the culture will be more innovative. But I think there's a case to be made that we should spend at least as much time, if not more, valuing the premise of connecting ideas and not just protecting them.
現在我們所有人面臨的挑戰是： 你怎麼創造環境 允許這些想法有這樣長的半衰期，是吧？ 很難去跟你的老闆說， “我有一個好主意給我們機構。 它在2020年將見效益。 你能不能給我一些時間做它呢？“ 現在，有幾家公司，如谷歌， 們有創新的休息時間，百分之二十的時間， 其中，在某種意義上，這些都是直覺的培養機制。 但是，這裡有一個關鍵環節。 而其他的是讓那些預感 可以與其他人的預感聯繫，這是經常發生的事情。 你有一個想法的一半，別人有另一半， 如果你們在合適的環境， 它們變成自己的東西比部分的總和更大。 因此，從某種意義上說， 我們經常談論 知識產權的保護， 我們去設置障礙 搞祕密的 研發實驗室 並且去申請專利，保存這些想法的價值， 我們認為這樣做人們會更有動力去創新 不過，我覺得我們應該至少 花相同多時間，甚至是更多時間 去將一些人們已有的想法連接起來 而不僅僅是保護它們，但它們相互不得個溝通。
And I'll leave you with this story, which I think captures a lot of these values, and it's just wonderful kind of tale of innovation and how it happens in unlikely ways. It's October of 1957, and Sputnik has just launched, and we're in Laurel Maryland, at the applied physics lab associated with Johns Hopkins University. And it's Monday morning, and the news has just broken about this satellite that's now orbiting the planet. And of course, this is nerd heaven, right? There are all these physics geeks who are there thinking, "Oh my gosh! This is incredible. I can't believe this has happened." And two of them, two 20-something researchers at the APL are there at the cafeteria table having an informal conversation with a bunch of their colleagues. And these two guys are named Guier and Weiffenbach. And they start talking, and one of them says, "Hey, has anybody tried to listen for this thing? There's this, you know, man-made satellite up there in outer space that's obviously broadcasting some kind of signal. We could probably hear it, if we tune in." And so they ask around to a couple of their colleagues, and everybody's like, "No, I hadn't thought of doing that. That's an interesting idea."
我給你們講個故事 我認為它體現了很多個我要表達的理念 並且它是一個美妙創新的故事 還有它是以不可能的方式發生的。 1957年10月 人造衛星剛剛上天， 在馬里蘭州勞雷爾的 應用物理實驗室(APL)， 約翰霍普金斯大學參予其中。 一個星期一早上， 衛星環繞地球飛行的 消息剛傳開。 當然，這是書呆子的天堂，對不對？ 所有這些物理怪才在那裡想： “噢，我的天哪！這是難以置信的。我無法相信這真發生了。“ 他們中的兩個 二十多歲的 研究人員 在食堂閒聊。 他們是圭爾和維芬巴赫。 他們開始交談，其中一個人說， “嘿，有誰試圖監聽這個東西嗎？ 你知道，人造地球衛星在太空， 顯然在廣播某種信號。 如果我們調對頻率，我們也許可以聽到它 “ 於是，他們四處向他們的同事打聽， 大家都說，“不，我沒想到這樣做。 這是一個有趣的想法。“
And it turns out Weiffenbach is kind of an expert in microwave reception, and he's got a little antennae set up with an amplifier in his office. And so Guier and Weiffenbach go back to Weiffenbach's office, and they start kind of noodling around -- hacking, as we might call it now. And after a couple of hours, they actually start picking up the signal, because the Soviets made Sputnik very easy to track. It was right at 20 MHz, so you could pick it up really easily, because they were afraid that people would think it was a hoax, basically. So they made it really easy to find it.
恰巧，維芬巴赫是一個 微波接收專家， 在他的辦公室設了 小天線與放大器。 因此圭爾和維芬巴赫回到維芬巴赫的辦公室， 開始試著與衛星聯接 - 像我們現在稱作黑客。 過了幾個小時，他們真的開始找到信號 因為蘇聯的人造衛星 很容易被追蹤。 就是在20兆赫，你可以真的很容易把它接受到， 因為他們害怕人們會覺得基本上是一個騙局。 因此，他們把它真的很容易找到它
So these two guys are sitting there listening to this signal, and people start kind of coming into the office and saying, "Wow, that's pretty cool. Can I hear? Wow, that's great." And before long, they think, "Well jeez, this is kind of historic. We may be the first people in the United States to be listening to this. We should record it." And so they bring in this big, clunky analog tape recorder and they start recording these little bleep, bleeps. And they start writing the kind of date stamp, time stamps for each little bleep that they record. And they they start thinking, "Well gosh, you know, we're noticing small little frequency variations here. We could probably calculate the speed that the satellite is traveling, if we do a little basic math here using the Doppler effect." And then they played around with it a little bit more, and they talked to a couple of their colleagues who had other kind of specialties. And they said, "Jeez, you know, we think we could actually take a look at the slope of the Doppler effect to figure out the points at which the satellite is closest to our antennae and the points at which it's farthest away. That's pretty cool."
當這兩個傢伙正坐在那裡聽來這個信號， 人們開始到他們的辦公室參觀， 說， “哇，這很酷。我能聽聽嗎？哇，太好了。” 不久之後，他們認為，“嗯呀，這是歷史性的一刻。 我們可能會是在美國的聽到它的第一批人。 我們應該記錄下來。“ 於是他們用一個大而笨重的模擬磁帶錄音機， 開始錄製這些訊號。 他們開始寫下每個小信號的 日期和時間。 他們便開始想，“好吧天哪，你知道，我們注意到 頻率變化很小。 如果我們利用多普勒效應， 做一些基本的數學計算， 我們也許可以計算出 衛星的旅行速度。 然後他們還做了別的一些嘗試 而且和有其他專長的 同事交談。 他們說：“哎呀，你知道， 我們覺得我們其實可以用多普勒效應的斜率， 算出衛星離我們的天線 最接近和 最遠的位置。 這是非常酷的想法。
And eventually, they get permission -- this is all a little side project that hadn't been officially part of their job description. They get permission to use the new, you know, UNIVAC computer that takes up an entire room that they'd just gotten at the APL. They run some more of the numbers, and at the end of about three or four weeks, turns out they have mapped the exact trajectory of this satellite around the Earth, just from listening to this one little signal, going off on this little side hunch that they'd been inspired to do over lunch one morning.
“最終，他們得到許可 這是一個小的副業項目，不是正式工作的一部分。 他們得到使用新UNIVAC計算機的許可， 它佔用整個房間，APL剛剛引進。 他們進行更多的運算，並在大約三，四個星期後， 基於在午餐時的 啟發， 僅憑監聽衛星信號， 他們已制訂了衛星的 精確軌跡。
A couple weeks later their boss, Frank McClure, pulls them into the room and says, "Hey, you guys, I have to ask you something about that project you were working on. You've figured out an unknown location of a satellite orbiting the planet from a known location on the ground. Could you go the other way? Could you figure out an unknown location on the ground, if you knew the location of the satellite?" And they thought about it and they said, "Well, I guess maybe you could. Let's run the numbers here." So they went back, and they thought about it. And they came back and said, "Actually, it'll be easier." And he said, "Oh, that's great. Because see, I have these new nuclear submarines that I'm building. And it's really hard to figure out how to get your missile so that it will land right on top of Moscow, if you don't know where the submarine is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. So we're thinking, we could throw up a bunch of satellites and use it to track our submarines and figure out their location in the middle of the ocean. Could you work on that problem?"
幾個星期後他們的老闆，弗蘭克麥克盧爾， 把他們拉進了房間，說： “嘿，你們這些傢伙， 關於該項目我有些東西要問你們。 你們已經從地面上的已知位置 找到了衛星 未知地點。 你們能反方向去做嗎？ 如果你知道衛星的位置， 能找出一地面上不明地點嗎？“ 他們想了想，說， “嗯，我想也許可以。讓我們算一下。” 所以他們回去，他們研究此事。 他們回來說，“其實，它會更簡單些。” 弗蘭克說，“哦，太棒了。 因為，這些新建造的 核潛艇。 如果你不知道潛艇在太平洋中部的位置， 真的很難找出如何讓你的導彈 準確降落在莫斯科的上方。 因此，我們在想，我們可以發射一些的衛星， 並用它來跟蹤我們的潛艇並找出 它們在海洋中的位置。 請問你們能解決這個問題嗎？“
And that's how GPS was born. 30 years later, Ronald Reagan actually opened it up and made it an open platform that anybody could kind of build upon and anybody could come along and build new technology that would create and innovate on top of this open platform, left it open for anyone to do pretty much anything they wanted with it. And now, I guarantee you certainly half of this room, if not more, has a device sitting in their pocket right now that is talking to one of these satellites in outer space. And I bet you one of you, if not more, has used said device and said satellite system to locate a nearby coffeehouse somewhere in the last -- (Laughter) in the last day or last week, right?
這就是全球定位系統是如何誕生的。 30年後 羅納德。里根把它公開，並使其成為一個開放式平臺， 任何人藉此都創造和革新， 建立新的技術， 並向任何人 開放， 做他們 想要的。 而現在，我保證 這個房間的有一半人，如果不是更多， 在他們的口袋裡有一個設備現在 正和外層空間這些衛星中的一個在聯絡。 我敢打賭，你們中的一個，如果不是更多， 在昨天或上週使用了那些設備和衛星， 以找出附近的咖啡館 （眾笑） 對不對？
And that, I think, is a great case study, a great lesson in the power, the marvelous, kind of unplanned emergent, unpredictable power of open innovative systems. When you build them right, they will be led to completely new directions that the creators never even dreamed of. I mean, here you have these guys who basically thought they were just following this hunch, this little passion that had developed, then they thought they were fighting the Cold War, and then it turns out they're just helping somebody find a soy latte. That is how innovation happens. Chance favors the connected mind.
我想 這是極好的一個案例 它顯示出了開放的創新體系 所蘊含的潛在的 非常驚人同時又不可預測的力量 當你把這些系統完善，它們將把創造者指引到 甚至從未夢想的嶄新的方向。 我的意思是，這些傢伙基本上 只是跟著這個預感， 這個小激情， 那時候他們在想他們是在打冷戰， 到今天，他們的發明就被用來 幫助你們找到一杯大豆拿鐵 。創新就是這麼發生的！ 機會垂青相互聯繫的腦袋 。
Thank you very much. 非常感謝。