泰瑟电击体验与执法记录仪内容讨论
>>: 被泰瑟枪电击是什么感觉？
英文原文
**>>**: What is it like being tased?>>: 这么说吧，真的非常微妙。被电击的那一刻令人感到恐惧，因为你失去了对身体的控制，而且感觉有一股股能量波袭来。被泰瑟枪击中的那 5 秒钟，感觉极其漫长。在那段时间里，我甚至有了某种哲学层面的领悟：那些无法控制自己身体的人到底是什么感受。随后电流就被切断了。
英文原文
**>>**: So, it's really interesting. It's terrifying while it's happening because you lose control of your body and there's like these waves of energy. 5 seconds while you're being hit with a taser. Seems like a very long time. And I had long enough to like have this philosophical like realization about what it must be like for people who can't control their body. And then the current was off.>>: 但这可一点都不好玩。
英文原文
**>>**: But it's it's not fun.>>: 但一旦关掉，就彻底结束了。一旦切断电流，你瞬间就能恢复正常。
英文原文
**>>**: But when it's off, it's off. Like you're right back to normal the second it's off.>>: 难道只有我认为执法记录仪（body cams）蕴藏着巨大的内容商业机会吗？这些设备记录下来的内容实在太精彩了。这么想很疯狂吗？它不仅从社会角度具有价值，而且还包含大量极具娱乐性的内容。
英文原文
**>>**: Am I the only person who thinks that there's a great content business in body camps? There's just so much good content that comes out of these things. Like, is that just crazy? It's not just valuable from a social perspective, but it's like there's a ton of entertaining content.>>: 曾经有一家公司——你还记得《Live PD》吗？
英文原文
**>>**: Well, there was a company that remember Live PD.>>: 我不知道你是否记得那个节目。
英文原文
**>>**: I don't if you remember that.>>: 曾经有一个节目在周五晚上直播警察巡逻，叫《Live PD》。他们当时是……
英文原文
**>>**: There was a show that did just live PD on Friday nights. They were>>: 警察节目。还记得《Cops》吗？跟我一起上高中的一个孩子，他父亲就在电视上制作了《Cops》。是的，我猜这类内容一直都很吸引人。
英文原文
**>>**: cops. Remember Cops? This kid I went to high school with, his dad uh produced Cops on TV. I Yeah, I guess it's always been interesting.>>: 是的。《Live PD》就是新版的《Cops》。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. So Live PD was the new version of Cops>>: 他们的特别之处在于那是现场直播，所以人们会在周末晚上收看，就像看体育赛事直播一样想知道当下正在发生什么。但在乔治·弗洛伊德事件之后，该节目被取消了。制作公司当时大概不敢分享支持警察的内容。实际上，我们自己也曾做过一段时间的 Axon Studios，尝试做你刚才说的那种业务——基于执法记录仪的现场内容业务。但这关乎你的企业基因。我们太支持警方了，而且我们是一家大企业，做不出把内容业务做成功所必需的那种前卫出格的事。
英文原文
**>>**: and their twist was that it was live so people would tune in on on weekend nights because like oh I want to see what's happening like a live sporting event. Uh but then they got cancelled after the George Floyd incident. Uh you know I think the production companies were afraid to be sharing you know pro police. Um, so we we actually ourselves had done Axon Studios for a period of time to try to do exactly what you're talking about like a, you know, live content business uh, out of the body cameras, but it's just it, you know, you got to know your corporate DNA. We, uh, we are too like pro police and we're like, you know, we're a we're a big corporation that wasn't going to do the edgy things you would need to do to make that a great content business.>>: 是啊。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah.>>: 但我认为这个机会确实摆在那里，等待别人去开拓。
英文原文
**>>**: But I think it's it's there for somebody to do it.>>: 是的。YouTube 模式就挺有效。[赞助广告部分] AppLovin 最初仅靠一个 8 美元的域名起步，没有获得风险投资，如今已成长为全球最大的广告平台之一。现在，正是这同一引擎在为电商应用广告提供支持。您的广告可以在手机游戏中展示，以无干扰的全屏体验触达超过 10 亿人群。该平台能自动寻找买家并优化利润。您设定目标，其余都交由它完成。某炊具品牌借此实现了从 400 万美元到 1600 万美元的增长并扭亏为盈，今年有望达到 8000 万美元。立即访问 applovin.com/allin 开启您的首个广告活动。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. Well, YouTube works. Going all app started with an $8 domain no VC funding and [music] became one of the largest ad platforms in the world. Now that same engine powers app [music] ads for e-commerce. Your ads run inside mobile games reaching over a billion people with full screen distraction-free attention. The platform finds buyers and optimizes for profit. You see the target, it does the rest. One cookware brand went from 4 million to 16 million, turned profitable, and is on pace for 80 million this year. Visit apploven.com/allin to launch your [music] first campaign today.Axon 创业起源与非致命武器初心
>>: Axon 首席执行官里克·史密斯（Rick Smith），欢迎来到 All-In 访谈。
英文原文
**>>**: Rick Smith, CEO of Axon, welcome to the all-in interview.>>: 能来这里真是太棒了，谢谢。
英文原文
**>>**: It's awesome to be here. Thanks.>>: 很高兴我们能促成这次对话。我知道我们之前讨论过请你参加峰会，但时间推迟错过了窗口期，不过我非常高兴这次终于成行。你们的商业历程非常引人入胜。如果方便的话，我很想带大家回顾一下这家公司的起点。你们公司过去叫做 Taser（泰瑟）。我想大家都记得最初的泰瑟名称和产品，但或许你能带我们快速回顾一下公司早期是如何创立的。
英文原文
**>>**: I'm glad we could make this work out. I know uh we had talked about having you come out to the summit and got delayed, missed that window, but I'm really glad that this has worked out. You know, your business history is fascinating. I would love if you're okay with it maybe to go back a little bit to the beginning of the business. Your company used to be called Taser. I think we all remember the original Taser name and product, but maybe you could take us back like we could do a real quick recap how the company got started in the early days.>>: 好的。我们在 90 年代初创立。这也是我做过的唯一一份工作。1993 年在图森的一个车库里起步。这件事的起因是我当时在欧洲读研究生，许多欧洲学生都说他们不敢来美国，因为在电视上看到了太多枪支暴力。我常对他们说，并非所有事情都像新闻报道的那样。其中一个人问我是否认识被枪杀的人。这让我突然一惊：实际上我还真认识。我高中橄榄球队里有两个队友就在一起路怒事件中被枪杀了。另外我们还认识几位家庭朋友。算下来大概有五六个人。当时触动我的是：为什么到了 1993 年，甚至到了 2026 年，子弹这种东西仍然存在？我的意思是，这是一项相当古老的技术，子弹已经存在了好几个世纪。一个简单的想法是：如果我们拥有柯克船长那样的相位枪，人们就会选择不去杀害他人，因为他们有了一种更文明的方式来制止威胁他们的人。就这样一环扣一环，我发现早在 1970 年代，住在亚利桑那州图森的一位 NASA 科学家就发明了一种名为泰瑟的设备。我通过他的专利文件找到了他。随后我直接给他打电话说：“嗨，这项技术后来怎么样了？我觉得这是世界能够用得上的东西。”不久之后，他邀请我去了他家。当时我还是个 23 岁的小伙子，而他是一位 73 岁的老人，听起来就像漫画书里的情节。但我们就在他的车库里开始着手制造新型泰瑟枪。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. So, uh, we started in the early 90s. So, this is the only job I've ever had. Started in 93 in a garage in Tucson. Um, the sort of leadup to that is I was in graduate school in Europe and a bunch of the European students were saying they were afraid to come to America because of all the gun violence they were seeing on TV. And I would tell them like, you know, look, that's not not everything is like what you see on the news. Um, and one of them asked me if I knew anyone who'd been shot and killed. And it just struck me. I was like, wow, actually I do. There were these two guys that played on my high school football team that were shot and killed in a road rage incident. And we knew a couple friends of the family. By the time I added up, it was like maybe five or six people. And the thing that struck me was why is it that like bullets are still a thing in 1993, much less 2026. And what I mean is like it's a pretty old technology, right? I mean, bullets have been around for many centuries. Um, and the simple insight was if we had Captain Kirk's phaser, like people would choose not to kill other people because they'd have a more civilized way to stop somebody who's threatening them. And one thing led to another. I discovered this device called the taser had been invented back in the 1970s by a NASA scientist who lived in Tucson, Arizona. I found him through his patent filings and one thing led to another. I just called him up and I said, "Hey man, whatever happened to this this tech? It seems to me like this is something the world could use." And shortly thereafter, he invited me down to his house, and here I am, this 23-y old kid and this 73 year old man. It sounds like, I don't know, a comic book uh sort of plot. But we started in his garage to build new tasers.>>: 我可以告诉你，刚开始的时候所有人都觉得我疯了。
英文原文
**>>**: And uh I can tell you at the beginning, everybody thought I'd lost my mind.>>: 事实上，我这里有一段很棒的视频，记录了埃米尔·迈克尔（Emil Michael）——他是 Uber 曾经的高管之一，现在担任负责战争事务的副部长——在他 23 岁时来拜访我，他们拍了一段恶搞视频来嘲讽我，笑话我居然要去做电击武器，觉得这个想法简直荒唐透顶。
英文原文
**>>**: In fact, I have a great video of Emil Michael, who is one of the leaders at Uber. He's now the under secretary of war. Came to visit me when he was 23 and they filmed a spoof video making fun of me just how crazy this idea was that I was going to go make electrical weapons.>>: 所以你通过专利检索找到了泰瑟设备的发明人，前去拜访他，然后收购或获得授权并围绕它创办了一家公司。
英文原文
**>>**: So you found the inventor of the taser device through a patent filing, go and visit him and buy it or license it and form a company around it.>>: 没错。实际上，我说服了他和我一起干，让他退而不休并为我指引方向。我们在他的车库里用 Ace Hardware 买来的零件制造了第一批泰瑟枪。因为我们必须做的第一件事是获得联邦政府的批准，证明这种新型泰瑟枪不会被归为某种非法武器，而这需要监管机构的批准。现在回想起来，你根本意识不到初创公司相对于外界来说动作有多快。我们从启动到制造出第一个原型只花了 30 天。你看，现在我有 6000 名员工了。
英文原文
**>>**: Yep. In fact, I convinced him to do it with me to come out of retirement and sort of show me the way. So, we were building the first tasers in his garage from parts from Ace Hardware. Uh because the first thing we had to do was to get federal government approval that the new taser would not be considered some sort of illegal weapon. Uh and that would require a regulatory approval. As I look back, you just you don't realize how fast you move when you're a startup relative to the rest of the world. Like we built our first prototype in 30 days from Go, you know, now I've got 6,000 people.>>: 这是哪一年？
英文原文
**>>**: Was this?>>: 那是 1993 年。
英文原文
**>>**: It was 93.从消费级转向警用市场与早期生存挑战
>>: 1993 年。你马上成立了一家公司，并用自己的钱造出了第一个原型。
英文原文
**>>**: 93. And you started a company right away and built the first prototype with your own money.>>: 是的，资金来自亲朋好友。我父亲曾多次创业，在硅谷有一家成功的公司，因此他认识很多风险投资人，但没有风投愿意碰我们。在 90 年代末我们不是互联网公司，当时正处于互联网狂潮的顶峰。大家都觉得我们是个异类。现在看到我们取得了充分的成功，并且随着世界的变化，国防和警务技术比当年主流得多了，我深感自豪。但当时这只是一款手持泰瑟设备。最初的目标市场是什么？是卖给警察部门吗？你们当时打算如何推向市场？第一笔销售是怎样完成的？
英文原文
**>>**: Uh yeah, it was friends and family. My now my dad was a serial entrepreneur. Uh and he had had one successful company in Silicon Valley. So he knew a lot of the VCs, but no VC would touch us, right? We weren't the internet in late 90s. It was right in the peak internet boom. U and again, everybody thought we were this sort of oddball uh oddball thing. And I'm actually pretty proud now that we've seen enough success that uh and with the changes in the world that defense and policing technology is now much more mainstream than it was back then. But this was a handheld taser device. What what was the market initially? Was it to sell into police forces? How did you think you were going to go to market? And what was your first sale?>>: 我们最初的目标市场是普通消费者。警察虽然也可以购买原版的泰瑟枪，但原版泰瑟枪本质上属于枪支，外形却像手电筒。这使它被归入了第二类武器管制，类似于短管霰弹枪，实际上成了违禁品，普通人极难买到，但警察仍可采购。我们的思路是：如果利用压缩空气代替火药制造出这种新型泰瑟武器，它就不再属于枪械，像我母亲这样的人就能买来防卫自身——大约在同一时期，她刚买了一把手枪。因此我们从消费市场切入，但举步维艰，完全没有成功。消费者给我们的反馈是：“如果这东西真那么好使，为什么警察不用呢？”于是我们意识到，必须先在警务领域证明它的效用。在经历了 7 年的挣扎与失败后，我们在 1999 年底转型进入警用市场，公司业务自此腾飞。不过就像麦克阿瑟誓言重返菲律宾一样，一旦我们在警用领域证明泰瑟枪与手枪同样有效甚至更有效，我必将重返消费级市场。这将在接下来的五年内发生。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. No, our first our our first market was consumers. So, uh, you know, police could buy the original taser, but due to basically the original taser was a firearm, but it looked like a flashlight. That puts it into this category 2, which is like a saw-off shotgun, which effectively makes it illegal, very hard to buy, but police could still buy them. So, our theory was if we made this new taser weapon using compressed air instead of gunpowder, it would not be a firearm, and then people like my mom could go buy it to defend herself. And she had recently bought a gun around that same time. So we started in the consumer market and we struggled and we didn't really succeed and what we heard from consumers was hey if this thing you know really works why aren't the police using it and so we basically realized we we need to go prove this works in policing so after 7 years of struggling and failing we pivoted into the police market in late 99 and that's when the business took off but like MacArthur of the Philippines I will return to the consumer market once we have proven with police that the taser is as effective or even more effective than a gun. And that will happen in the next five years.>>: 所以你花了整整七年时间开拓市场、寻找产品市场匹配（PMF），全部资金都来自亲友。是什么支撑着你坚持下去的？中途是否有某一刻你想放弃并说：“算了，我认输了，我应该换个行当”？这是经典的创业难题：面对多次转折，你愿意转型多少次？
英文原文
**>>**: And so you spent seven years developing the market trying to find product market fit all off of friends and family money. What was keeping you in it? Was there a point where you said, "Hey, I'm going to throw the towel in. We should go do something else with my life." I mean, this is kind of a classic entrepreneur, you know, how many times are you willing to pivot question?>>: 是的，我们经历了两次产品发布失败。到了 1998 年，我拜访了硅谷的一些朋友，他们当时都在像雅虎这种名字古怪的公司工作，个个赚得盆满钵满。那时正值互联网淘金热，而我刚经历了第二次产品失败。我记得我去找我父亲——当时是他和他的一位朋友在为我们提供资金。我说：“听着，我觉得我们干脆把公司关了吧，我们已经失败两次了。”我父亲看着我说：“几年前能想通这点就好了，因为我们现在欠硅谷银行大约 200 万美元，我手里只剩 50 万美元而且承担着担保责任。如果我们关停，银行会拿走一切，我们别无选择。我把最后的 50 万美元投进去。”另一位投资人叫布鲁斯·卡尔弗（Bruce Culver）——向布鲁斯致敬，如果你正在看的话——布鲁斯也追加了等额的资金。因此，那是我们能拿到的最后 100 万美元，我们必须靠它活下去。靠着这笔钱，我们完成了警用泰瑟枪的设计、开模、制造和发布，并靠极度拮据的运营勉强支撑到现金流收支平衡，最终在两年后完成了首次公开募股（IPO）。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. So we we had two failed product launches. And then in 1998, I was visiting some of my friends up in Silicon Valley who'd taken jobs, you know, at at companies with dumb names like Yahoo. Uh, of course, they were all making money handover fist. It was the internet gold rush. And here I just failed on my second product. And I remember going to my dad, it was it was him and one of his friends that were funding this. And I said, "Look, I I think we should just shut it down. You know, we failed twice." Uh, and my dad looked at me and he said, 'Well, you know, it would have been nice to figure that a couple years ago because we owe Silicon Valley Bank about $2 million. I have $500,000 and I'm on the hook. So, if we shut down, the bank has taken everything. So, we have no choice. I'm putting my last $500,000 in. And the other investor was a guy named Bruce Culver. Uh, shout out Bruce if you're watching. Uh, Bruce matched him. And so, we that was going to be the last $1 million we would ever get. we would have to survive on it. And with that, we managed to design, tool, manufacture, and launch the police taser and then shoestring it along to cash flow, break even, and eventually an IPO two years later.上市、实地路演突破与做空危机
>>: 你们是在互联网泡沫破裂前后上市的，对吧？当时市场整体暴跌，但你们迎来了机会，因为你们已经有了实际收入。你们当时主要向谁销售？主要是警察部门，那是当时的核心市场。
英文原文
**>>**: So, you go public around the end of the dot boom, right? So, the market's kind of tanking generally and there's an opportunity because you guys now have revenue. You're selling into what? Police forces. That's the primary market at that point.>>: 是的，确实如此。回想起来，这真是天意巧合。互联网泡沫在 2000 年破裂。2000 年末，一家投资银行的人参加了我们的一次培训活动，他们惊呼道：“天哪，你们不是互联网公司，你们生产实体产品，拥有真实收入。我们要帮你们上市。”因此我们之所以能上市，很大程度上是因为银行需要交易标的，而我们不是互联网公司。我们上市时的估值在 1200 万美元左右。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah, it was. and and actually looking back on it um it was just an alignment of the fates. So yeah, the internet bubble popped in 2000 and in late 2000 an investment bank came to one of our training events and they basically were like, "Oh my gosh, you're not internet. You guys make a physical product. You have real revenue. We're taking you public." And so we went public specifically, I think because banks needed deals and we were not internet. Uh, and we went public at a massive about $12 million valuation.>>: 哇，但那已经是个巨大的成果了，对吧？你们当时拥有公司 100% 的股份，股东名册上没有风投机构。
英文原文
**>>**: Wow. And that was a big that was a big outcome though, right? Like you guys owned 100% of the company. You didn't have VCs or institutional guys on the cap table.>>: 是的。虽然作为上市公司我们的市值微乎其微，但正因如此，我们最终为俄勒冈州的波尔森（Paulson）投资银行带来了他们史上最高的回报率。对我而言，那是一种巨大的解脱，我们募集到了足够的资金偿还股东借款，我父亲不用落得破产的境地。对我来说，避免家庭陷入绝境是最大的解脱，自那之后发生的一切都像是额外的恩赐。
英文原文
**>>**: That's right. I mean, we were a tiny tiny uh market cap to go public, but because of that, you know, we ended up being the the the highest return I think that investment bank Pollson out of Oregon ever had. And and for us, like I'll tell you, for me, it was just it was such a relief that we were able to raise enough money to be able to pay off some shareholder notes so that I knew my dad wasn't going to end up in the poor house. That was to me the biggest relief is not destroying your family. And then everything from there has been gravy.>>: 你们早期是如何跨越鸿沟的？当你面对警局，手里拿着这个能射出电极扎入人体皮肤、将其电倒在地失去行动能力的手持设备时，你是如何让那些从未见过这类东西的警察下第一批采购订单的？订单是如何开始涌入的？是否有某个转折点，突然间足够多的警察部门配备了它，大家都觉得“我们必须拥有”，市场随之爆发？
英文原文
**>>**: How do you cross that chasm? Those early days, you show up to a police force, you've got this handheld device that shoots out these electrodes that go into someone's skin and zaps them and they fall to the ground. when they get incapacitated. What was the way that you kind of got these guys who had never heard of or seen anything like this before to make those first POS? How do you start to get those orders to come in? And was there a moment where suddenly enough police forces had this where everyone was like, "We all got to have this and then the market just kind of took off.">>: 我们当时没钱做任何花哨的推广，最核心的一点在于我们解决了一个真实的问题。早期的泰瑟枪威力不足。比如罗德尼·金当年曾被洛杉矶警方的泰瑟枪击中，但根本没起作用，警方转而使用警棍殴打，造成了灾难性后果。因此泰瑟在 90 年代末名声极差，这也算罪有应得，因为我送出的几批初代产品演示也无法制止具有攻击性的人，对方能忍受疼痛硬扛过去。我们所做的突破是通过动物实验调整神经电刺激的强度，使其能真正导致人体肌肉失能。做到这一点后，推广就很直接了。我们没钱做大型广告，就聘请了一位退役海军陆战队员，让他开着一辆温尼贝戈（Winnebago）房车、兜里揣着 100 美元钞票跑遍全美。他走进各地警局，向警察解释产品。在此之前，非致命武器一直被视为骗局，比如胡椒喷雾虽然很痛但能硬抗过去；而我们造出了第一款能真正让人瘫痪的武器。警察是一群很有勇气的人，他们说：“行啊，你觉得这玩意管用？那来试试。”我们提出：谁能扛住走过来拿到那 100 美元，钱就归谁。结果一开枪击中，他们直接倒地，爬起来拍拍灰尘惊呼：“天哪，这威力远超我的预期。”有些人还想再试一次。他们立刻看到了价值。无数警察曾对我说：“天哪，如果早有这个，我就不必开枪打死某人，也不必冒着生命危险去和极其危险的嫌疑人肉搏了。”价值主张极其简单，我们只需证明它有效。通过简单直观的演示，订单开始纷至沓来。我们能看着培训师汉斯（Hans）在全国的行进路线追踪订单增长。一年之内我们就实现了现金流平衡。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. So, I mean, this is one of those things where look, you just don't over complicate life. Um, we didn't have enough money to do anything fancy and uh the main thing was we had solved a real problem. So the early generation tasers were not powerful enough. Like Rodney King was shot with an LAPD taser and it did not work and they went to the batons with catastrophic consequences. So taser had a terrible reputation in the late '9s and it was deserved uh because I'd sent several demos of our first generation product that also didn't stop somebody who was focused and aggressive. They could fight through the pain. So the thing we had done was we had basically done some animal testing to go tune the amount of nerve stimulation so that it would actually paralyze somebody. Once we did that, the launch was pretty simple. We didn't have money for a big ad campaign. We hired a former Marine and put him in a Winnebago going around the country with a $100 bill and he would go into a police department, explain to them what we're doing. And up until then, non-lethal weapons were seen as kind of snake oil. Like they like, "Yeah, pepper spray hurts, but you can fight through it." We had the first weapon that could actually stop somebody. And cops are an interesting crowd. You know, there's a fair amount of uh bravery, shall we say. And so, they weren't afraid. They're like, "Okay, you think this will work? Fine. Let's give it a try." And we would offer them a $100 if they could come and take it. Uh and we hit them. They would fall down. They'd dust themselves off and go, "Oh my god, that was way more powerful than I was expecting." Some would try again. Uh and then immediately they saw the value. I mean, I can't tell you how many times I've had cops tell me, "My gosh, like this would have prevented me from shooting someone or getting in a knockdown dragout fight with a very dangerous person." So, the value prop was so simple. We just had to convince them it worked. And we did that with very simple demos and and and from that you could see suddenly purchase orders started coming in and we could track where Hans was going across the country, our trainer. Um, and you know, within a year we hit cash flow, break even.>>: 然后随后的十年里，你们的股价似乎一直停留在同一区间，不是吗？很多人以为一旦上市就会一飞冲天、保持增长，但经历了七八年的非上市摸索，上市后你们又有大约十年时间股价一直在每股几美元的区间徘徊，对吧？
英文原文
**>>**: And then you had like a decade where the stock kind of stayed in the same range, didn't it? Yeah. A lot of people think like, okay, you go public, this thing's going to take off. We're on some growth trajectory. But again, after how many years? Seven years of being a private company, eight years of kind of getting to that point of having an IPO, you then spent another decade kind of with this valuation in this range of a couple bucks a share, right?>>: 实际情况比这更跌宕起伏。前 7 年我们在生死线上挣扎，连电费都快付不起。2001 年上市后的四年简直不可思议，我们每年业绩翻三倍。2004 年我们成为全球表现最好的股票，在华尔街日报的一年和三年回报率榜单上均位列第一，我还把当时的报道挂在墙上。
英文原文
**>>**: Oh, yeah. No, actually, let me give you It's more exciting than that. So 7 years of like are we going to survive? We can't pay the light bill. Then we go public in 2001 and the next four years are insane. We're growing at like we're we're tripling every year. In 2004 we were the number one performing stock in the world. I have the Wall Street Journal article on the wall on a one in threeyear return basis. We were number one.>>: 那一年正是谷歌上市的年份。
英文原文
**>>**: That was the year Google went public.>>: 是的，我们当时势头极猛。但在 2004 年底遭遇了美国证券交易委员会（SEC）的调查。当时有人指控我们谎报产品安全性以抬高股价。这里面涉及一场惨烈的做空袭击，做空机构建了大量空头头寸。我的私人助理甚至被做空机构收买成了内鬼，把公司内部机密文件泄露给做空机构，后者再转交给《纽约时报》，《纽约时报》披露称从空头那里获取了公司的未公开重大内幕信息。那段时期极其痛苦，2005 年我们的股价从每股 33 美元暴跌至 7 美元。你在怀疑自己能否活下来。客户都是警局，他们暂停了采购，说：“哥们，你们正面临联邦调查，在调查结束前我没法向市议会交代。”于是我没有听从律师的常规建议，直接带着几大箱文件走进旧金山的 SEC 办公室对他们说：“各位，我想全力协助你们完成调查，因为如果一直拖下去，我们公司可能会倒闭。”自那以后便进入了漫长的低谷期，股价长年未能彻底恢复。
英文原文
**>>**: Uh yeah. Yeah. I mean we we were on fire. Then what happened in late 2004? We got we got hit with an SEC investigation. Uh there were allegations we'd lied about the safety of our products uh in order to pump up the stock price. Now, we could do a whole hour on this. There was a short selling attack. We had uh big short positions in the stock. My personal assistant was actually a mole for short sellers who was selling. It was crazy. at sending internal documents to short sellers that were giving them to the New York Times who was then disclosing they were getting internal confidential material non-public information from short sellers who were somehow getting it out of our company. Uh so that was miserable. 2005 our stock dropped from $33 to $7 a share. Uh and it was uh yeah it was miserable. I mean you're wondering if you're going to survive. Our customers are police so they stop buying from us. They're like look dude you're under federal investigation. like I can't go to my city council until this is over. So, ignoring my lawyer's advice, I walked into the front offices of the SEC office in San Francisco with boxes of documents and said, "Hey guys, I want to help you complete your investigation because I may go out of business if this drags on." Um, and then that's when the long doldrums began. Like the stock never fully recovered from there. Uh, and we were诉讼浪潮、硬抗和解与哈迪·帕托维的加盟
>>: 那次调查的结果如何？最终结案了吗？
英文原文
**>>**: What happened with that investigation? That investigation, you moved on from it.>>: 调查结束时他们不会发一朵小红花表扬你，只是出具了“无任何违规认定”的结论便结案了，这已经是最好的结果。但凡杀不死你的，必使你更强大。在那期间，我们面临的诉讼从零激增到数百起，不仅有股东诉讼，任何被警方泰瑟枪击中的人都在起诉警方和我们，因为我们在新闻中铺天盖地。
英文原文
**>>**: Oh, yeah. I mean, they don't give you a gold star when they're done and tell you good job. They just say no findings and they move on, which is as good as it gets. Um, turns out though, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Uh, in that case, we had gone from zero lawsuits to hundreds of lawsuits. I mean, we were being sued obviously by shareholders. We were being sued by plaintiffs of of like anybody who got shot by a police taser was now suing the police and us because we were all over the news. Um, and we did a couple things there.>>: 你们当时的市值是多少？
英文原文
**>>**: What's your market cap during this time?>>: 2004 年底最高曾达到约 20 亿美元，随后跌回大约 1 亿美元。
英文原文
**>>**: Uh it it peaked about two billion in late 2004 and then it was back to about a hundred million. Uh>>: 所以一家市值只有 1 亿美元左右的公司，却要应对数百起诉讼。
英文原文
**>>**: so you're f you get hundreds of lawsuits when you're kind of like a hundred million dollar market cap company that you're dealing with.>>: 是的，按常理我们本该倒闭，能够挺过来全凭顽强意志和一点近乎疯狂的坚持。我们像大家一样买了商业保险。在第一批案子开庭时，保险公司想花大约 200 万美元与原告和解，我们坚决反对说：“绝对不行！一旦和解，我们就会被淹没在诉讼狂潮中，这会危及公司的生存。如果你们擅自和解，我们就起诉你们保险公司。但我们给你们一个出路：你们把原本要赔给原告的 200 万打折给我们，我们签署免除你们赔偿责任的协议，由我们亲自打到底。”我们这样操作了两次，因为最终胜诉，我们甚至在诉讼中赚到了钱。在当时看来这是极其疯狂的举动：与自己的保险公司和解，阻止他们给原告赔偿一分钱，只因为我们深信自己是对的。这个策略起到了效果。几十年来破天荒第一次，现在我们身上没有任何未决诉讼。如果你想告我们，最好拿出真本事；如果我们确实犯了错，我们会理性解决并达成和解；但如果你在无理的事情上起诉我们，我们就会像宗教狂热分子一样死磕到底以捍卫我们的信念体系。这至关重要，也保护了我们的业务。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. We should have gone under like we should not have survived. It was only by pure grit and frankly a little bit of craziness. Like we um our our insurance company because we have insurance like everybody and we go to trial on our first cases. Our insurance company wanted to settle this first case for like around $2 million and we said, "Hell no, you can't. If you settle this case, we will get swamped in litigation. Um, you're putting our business at risk. If you settle the case, we'll sue you, but we're going to give you an out. If you will pay the pliff $2 million, we'll take a little bit less. You can pay us and we'll sign away our liability and we'll take it across the goal line." We did that twice. We actually made money on those cases because we won. But the point is this was this was slightly what was considered crazy behavior that we would settle with our own insurance to prevent them from giving a dime to the plaintiffs because we believed we were right and it worked. Like today, for the first time, I should knock on wood. For the first time in decades, we now have zero litigation cases. Cuz if you sue us, you better bring your agame. Like if we now if we did something wrong, we're going to be rational and we will settle it. We're reasonable people. But you sue us on something where we think, you know, we're in the right, we will we dig in like religious fanatics to defend our belief system. And that's important and that's what protected our business.>>: 这种情况持续了多年，诉讼不断，市值停滞，一直延续到 2012 年左右，对吧？里克，我的好友哈迪·帕托维（Hadi Partovi）在你们的董事会，对吧？
英文原文
**>>**: This lasts for years, right? These lawsuits, this market cap kind of being static. This this went on till what about 2012 or so? And Rick, a buddy of mine, Hottie Parti, is on your board, right?>>: 是的。
英文原文
**>>**: He is. Yeah.>>: 他在你们董事会很久了。首先，你们俩是怎么认识的？其次，他曾提到过他在早期维持公司生存方面所发挥的作用，你能讲讲发生了什么吗？
英文原文
**>>**: And so he's been on your board for a long time. First of all, how'd you guys meet? And second of all, he mentioned some story about the role he played early on in keeping the business alive. Can you tell us what happened?>>: 他发挥的作用再怎么强调都不为过。哈迪和我是大学同学。90 年代末当我为泰瑟业务苦苦挣扎时，他是那群在互联网热潮中大获成功的朋友之一。到了 2007、2008 年前后，我们开始着手研发执法记录仪业务，大约在 2010 年投入运营，坦白说我当时搞砸了。我从未打造过一家软件公司，虽然招募了一个团队，但举步维艰。我给哈迪打电话求助说：“哥们，我需要帮助。我创办了这家软件公司，我在车库里造过初代泰瑟，自认懂硬件制造，但软件这摊事，我招来的负责人并不合适，技术问题频发，我甚至不知道该如何招聘并扩展软件团队。”我邀请哈迪加入董事会，他作为董事实际上担任了我大约五年的兼职首席技术官（CTO），帮我重构团队并走上正轨。我们最初本想自建数据中心来管理客户数据，结果发生了一次近乎毁灭性的宕机故障，差点丢失所有客户数据。哈迪对我说：“这世上值得攻克的难关有很多，但自建数据中心绝对是得不偿失的事情。”于是我们把数据迁移到了 AWS，随后又使用了 Azure。哈迪拯救了公司，是他指引我如何在一家武器公司内部从零搭建起软件业务。当时股东们都觉得我疯了，质疑我为何要把一家军械公司变成软件公司。就像许多创业者一样，我当时完全没有意识到这是多么疯狂的念头，而哈迪正是帮助我实现这一目标的关键人物。
英文原文
**>>**: Oh, yeah. I cannot overstate his importance. So, Heidi and I were friends in college. So, he was one of my buddies who was out making a bunch of money in the internet boom in the late 90s when I was struggling to get this taser business off the ground. Then what happened uh around 2007 89 we were working on our body camera business and uh we we launched we were initially operational around 2010 or so and I frankly had a disaster on my hands. I had never built a software company. I'd hired a team. Um, and let's just say we were struggling hard. And so I called Hottie and I was like, "Hey man, uh, I need some help. Like, I've started this software company. I, you know, I built the original tasers in a garage. I feel like I got my hands around this, but this software thing, you know, turns out the guy I'd hired is probably, you know, not the right not the right guy. we were having technical issues and frankly I was struggling to wrap my head around uh like how how do we staff and grow this business? This is pretty new to me. And so I asked Heidi if he would join the board and he came on. He was effectively he was a board member but he was really my part-time CTO for about 5 years where he helped me sort through get the right business in get the right team in place. We moved like we were originally building our own data center that we were going to manage for our customers. We had a near catastrophic outage where we nearly lost all our customer data. And you know, Heidi was like, "Hey man, like there's plenty of hard things to do in this world. Like trying to figure out how to run your own data center is not one that's worth the squeeze." So we moved over to the cloud with AWS and then with Azure. Um, and yeah, so I I like to say Hottie saved the business because he came in, he was the guy who helped me navigate how to build a software business from scratch inside a weapon business. And by the way, as we were doing this, our shareholders thought I'd lost my mind. They're like, "Rick, you're trying to turn a weapon company into a software company." And I guess I was like many entrepreneurs, you don't realize what a crazy idea that was. And and Heidi was the guy who helped me do it.>>: 他现在还在董事会吗？
英文原文
**>>**: Did he stay on your board?>>: 是的，他依然在董事会。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah, he's still on my board.从 Taser 到 Axon：云服务与执法记录仪的爆发
>>: 太棒了。如今你们是一家市值约 350 亿到 400 亿美元的公司，想必他也获得了丰厚回报。
英文原文
**>>**: Amazing. I mean, this the stock price, you're you're like a 3540 billion market cap company today. He must have done well, I'm assuming.>>: 是的。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, and and uh>>: 而且哈迪也是推动我们将公司名称从 Taser 改为 Axon 的人。当时做出这个决定非常艰难，我们在 Taser 品牌上倾注了大量心血并引以为豪，不想给人一种退缩的感觉。但哈迪指出：“泰瑟是一个‘大铁锤’式的单一品牌，在人们心中它只代表电击武器，而你们所做的事情远不止于此。”他帮我想通了这一点，事实证明他是对的。如今泰瑟只是我们业务中的一小部分，虽然依然重要，但我们的业务范围已大幅拓展。我认为我们现在每天处理的视频量比 YouTube 还要大。当然 YouTube 的观众更多，但我们有超过 100 万名警察每天通过执法记录仪上传大约 2 小时的视频，海量的内容必须安全地管理与共享，其复杂性极高。得益于哈迪当年的支持，帮我理清业务并在飞机飞行过程中完成了换引擎式的重构，我们如今拥有了一支优秀的团队。
英文原文
**>>**: and and Heidi also was the guy who pushed for us to change the name from Taser to something else, which became Axon because and and look, at the time that was hard. We're really invested in our brand. We're proud of the taser. We didn't want to feel like we're retreating. And Hottie's point was like, "Hey, man, the taser is a kind of a it's a sledgehammer brand. It means electric weapon to people and you do a lot more than that." And so, you know, he he helped me think that through and and he was right. You know, now we have the the taser is a small part of the business. It's important, but you know, it's we have an expansive business now. We manage, I think, more video every day than YouTube. Now, they have a lot more viewers, but we have over a million police officers uploading two hours of video, you know, every day from one of these body cameras. Uh, so we have a ton of content and of course, it's got to be securely managed and shared, and there's been a lot of complexity. Uh, and of course, I've got a great team in place now, thanks to Hottie coming in and and sort of helping me learn this business and rebuild the plane while we were flying. Okay, go hottie.>>: 这期间还发生了一件事。在面对各种诉讼进行抗辩的同时，我们也转入主动进攻，打造了执法记录仪。而研发记录仪的原因在于，我们的客户（警察）当时常被指控在使用泰瑟枪时实施了可怕的行为。我在加州北部作为共同被告参与了一起案件的庭审，一名受害者在被警方羁押期间死亡。那是一位 40 岁男子，有长达 20 年的甲基苯丙胺吸毒史，身体状况极度恶化。我记得庭审时警察对我说，原告家属一直向陪审团出示死者高中毕业时的照片，警察看着我说：“我那天晚上去那栋房子时看到的根本不是这个人，我看到的是一个宛如电影《驱魔人》里走出来的怪物。”那位当了 26 年警察的老警员告诉我，职业生涯中他从未感到害怕，直到面对那名吸毒过量者爆发出的兽性狂暴。然而在法庭上，这些事实很难传达给陪审团。警察陈述事实时必须保持克制专业的口吻，比如称其为“H先生”如何如何；而起诉警方的家属则会使用极具感染力和情绪化的语言。我对警察说：“你们完全处于下风，你们在讲述事实时需要投入更多热情。”他们回答：“里克，我们做不到。我们是公职人员，一旦在任何一句话上有半点不实，职业生涯就彻底终结了。”就在那一刻我们意识到：必须记录下真实的现场画面，直接向公众展示所见所为，而不是事后百口莫辩地解释。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. So, now there's one other thing that happened in there. So, while we were defending ourselves in all the litigation, we also went on offense and we created the body camera. And the reason we created the body camera was, you know what, the only way to defend ourselves and look, our customers were being accused of doing horrible things with taser weapons. I remember, right? Yeah. Yeah. Police officers. I was co-defending a case in Northern California where somebody died in police custody. It was a young, it was a 40-year-old man with a 20-year methamphetamine uh problem, and he was in really bad shape. And I remember the police officers telling me as we're watching the trial, the family kept putting up pictures of his high school graduation. And the officers looked at me and they said, "That's not the human being I saw the night I went to that house. I saw somebody that was literally like out of the Exorcist movie." This cop told me he'd been a cop for 26 years, had never been afraid in his career until the anim animalistic rage he had to deal with in this person who was, you know, had had overdosed on meth. But that never came across to the jury. And in that moment, I said, "My god, we have to record what you see." Because like when police officers describe things, they have to be very professional. In this case, it was, you know, when Mr. H did this or that, it very professional. the family that's suing the police, they would use very emotional, colorful language. And I was like, "Guys, you're getting your you're getting your asses kicked. Frankly, you need to tell your story with more passion." And they said, "Rick, we don't get to do that. Like, we work for the government. If if we get caught in one halftruth, that can be the end of our career." And that's when we realized like, "We need to record this so that you can show people what it is that you saw, what it is you did, rather than having to try to explain it.">>: 当时市面上难道没有其他做执法记录仪的公司吗？这种概念在当时是全新的吗？
英文原文
**>>**: Weren't there body cam companies already at the time? Did they exist? Was this concept novel?>>: 这个概念是全新的。当时虽然有像 GoPro 这样的消费级运动相机，我们确实没有发明相机本身，但我们研发了行业内首款专为警务设计的执法记录仪。中间还有一个插曲：负责开发首款记录仪的员工半夜突然辞职，一周后带着竞品推向市场，原来他是靠行使在公司的股票期权来暗中资助这个对立项目。虽然日后我们化解了矛盾并在多年后收购了那家公司，但正是这一探索开启了爆发式增长。我们从几亿美元市值成长为如今 300 亿美元规模的公司，全归功于执法记录仪。刚推出时警察根本不愿意佩戴，我们经历了整整 7 年的惨痛失败，警察抱怨这是“老大哥在监视”，担心主管会借此挑刺吹毛求疵。面对改变人们总能找到害怕的理由，但我们内心坚信他们需要向公众呈现执法过程以自证清白。同时我们做出了双重押注：不仅押注记录仪硬件，更押注云端架构，因为我们意识到，只有将视频存入云端基础设施才能实现规模化扩展；否则全美 1.8 万个警察局都得各自摸索如何安全架设视频服务器。
英文原文
**>>**: The concept was new. I mean, you did have GoPro with like consumer cameras. So, we certainly didn't invent the cameras, but we um again a quick detour. We were building the first police body camera and then the employee that was building it actually quit in the middle of the night and launched the product a week later. Turns out he was actually funding it with his stock options to build it against us. That's another bit of drama. But yes, we we were building the industry's first body camera. We ultimately, you know, made peace and we acquired that company back into the fold down the road. But but that's what that's what led to the eventual explo the reason that we're a I don't know a $30 billion company today, up from a couple hundred million is because of the body camera. And I'll tell you, when we launched the body camera, police didn't want to wear it. We had seven years of miserable failure where cops told us there's, you know, this is big brother. They're worried that their supervisor is going to nitpick them. I mean, look, change is hard, right? People find a lot of reasons like to be afraid of of of of new things, but we just believed in our in our soul. Guys, you need to be able to show people what you do. Uh, you're being accused of all sorts of awful stuff. And we made a double bet. Not only do we bet on body cameras, but we bet on the cloud because we realized the only way this would ever scale is if we put these videos into cloud infrastructure. Otherwise, you have 18,000 departments all trying to figure out how to run video servers securely.问责风险、双刃剑效应与弗格森事件拐点
>>: 但这给警方带来了巨大的责任风险，不是吗？警察突然之间需要承担全方位的问责。顺便说一句，我也很喜欢看执法记录仪视频，不论是警察做错了还是嫌疑人做错了，事件背后总充满戏剧张力。
英文原文
**>>**: But this creates a ton of liability for these police forces, doesn't it? Like now all of a sudden they're being held accountable. By the way, I love watching body cam videos. The cop did something wrong, the criminal did something wrong. I mean, there's always just drama to these stories.>>: 是的。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah.>>: 但很多警察难免会有顾虑，经常有报道称警察不知道摄像头正开着结果惹祸上身。这难道不存在责任风险吗？你们是如何说服客户承担这种风险的？他们是否也将其视为一把双刃剑，既是对自己的约束，同时也是为了自身安全、自我保护以及在法庭上胜诉的武器？
英文原文
**>>**: But I've got to imagine a lot of these police officers, because there's a lot of these stories that they're using the body cam or they don't they don't realize the body cam's on and they get themselves in trouble. And so isn't there a bit of a liability issue? And how do you end up selling your customer on putting themselves at risk? Or do they view it as a double-edged sword that it's also for their own safety, their own protection, and for winning cases?>>: 你准确指出了大家最初的担忧，这正是他们最初抵触的原因。然而，一位警察工会领袖曾说过一句名言：“没有哪个警察愿意戴执法记录仪，直到他佩戴了 90 天；自那之后，他不佩戴记录仪绝不会出门巡逻。”因为大家忽略了一点：警察一直在抓捕罪犯，而犯罪分子在撒谎构陷上毫无顾忌，虚假指控多得惊人。我举个例子：在执法记录仪早期，我曾跟随菲尼克斯的一位警察随车巡逻。我问他感觉如何，他说：“我起初很讨厌它，但听听上周发生在我身上的事吧：我逮捕了一名性工作者，她身上几乎半裸，处于吸毒致幻状态。当我把她推进巡逻车开往警局时，她开始冲我尖叫：‘如果你不立刻放我下车，我就说你强奸了我！’”警察对她说：“女士，我提醒你，我戴着执法记录仪，整个互动过程全程都在录像。你想说什么都可以，但全都被记录在案。”那位警察告诉我，对方的态度瞬间彻底转变并平静了下来。试想一下，如果他没有佩戴记录仪，面对强奸指控演变成各执一词的局面，很可能会导致职业生涯断送且百口莫辩。这只是一个缩影。真正的转折点发生在密苏里州弗格森市迈克尔·布朗（Michael Brown）枪击事件之后。还记得弗格森事件吗？
英文原文
**>>**: So, you are articulating the exact concern people had up front. That's why they didn't want to wear it because they had that perception. However, once actually a police union leader told me famously said, "No cop wants to wear a body camera until they've worn one for 90 days and then they will not go on patrol without it." Because what you don't realize, police are arresting criminals all the time. And criminals have no compunction about lying about what happened. The number of false allegations are incredible. I'm going to give you one example. I'm on a ride along with a cop in Phoenix, and this is in the early days of body cameras. And I said, "How's it going?" He said, "Well, I didn't like this, but let me tell you what happened to me last week. I was arresting a prostitute. She was basically more than half naked. She was high on some sort of drugs. And as I put her in the patrol car, as I'm driving her into the station, she starts screaming at him. I'm going to say you raped me. I'm going to say you raped me unless you have me out of the car right now. And he said, "Ma'am, I just want to let you know this is a body camera. I've been recording this entire interaction. You're free to say whatever you want, but it's all being recorded." And he said, "Her demeanor changed completely. She calmed down." And he said, "Now imagine what I would have gone through if I didn't have a body camera. If I had a woman accusing me of raping her and it turns into a he said, she said, like that could be a career-ending allegation with no way to disprove it. So that was that was like a microcosm. But the moment that things flipped was the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Remember Ferguson?>>: 记得。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah.>>: 白人警官，黑人当事人。当时迈克尔·布朗虽然没有武器，但体格远比威尔逊（Wilson）警官魁梧。根据威尔逊警官的说法，双方当时在夺枪。要知道警察参与的每一次搏斗都带有枪支风险，一旦发生夺枪，警官为了自卫开枪是合法的。但大家当时听到的版本是家属声称的“举起双手，不要开枪”，声称迈克尔·布朗试图投降；如果属实，那就是冷血谋杀。而警官坚称遭到攻击，事实上眼眶骨都被打碎了。随后的调查证明警官陈述基本属实，但在当时缺乏实据。在那起案件后，迈克尔·布朗的家属呼吁普及执法记录仪，警察工会也要求配备，希望能让世界看清真实情况。讽刺的是，如今当年大力倡导记录仪的一些民权团体却开始倒戈，批评记录仪没能抓出大量坏警察，声称设备存在问题。我的看法不同：我们必须承认一种可能——绝大多数警察恪尽职守却屡遭诬告，而执法记录仪恰恰证明了这一点。
英文原文
**>>**: White officer, black subject. Now, uh, Michael Brown was unarmed, but he was significantly larger than Officer Wilson. And according to officer Wilson, they were fighting over the gun. Like the officer, you know, an officer brings a gun to every fight they get in. And once they're fighting over the gun, you know, he's justified to defend himself. But if you remember the stories, the family was saying things like, remember, hands up, don't shoot. That that Michael Brown was trying to surrender. If that's true, then that was a cold-blooded murder. But if you listen to the officer, he says, "Hey, I was being attacked. In fact, I think he had a broken eye, a broken bone above his eye." Uh the subsequent review ended up showing that the officer was largely correct, but you couldn't prove it. And it was out after that case, Michael Brown's cam family said, "We want body cameras." And the police union said, "You know what? We want them because we at least want the world to see what's happening." And now, as I sit here today, what's interesting, some of these civil liberties groups that were big proponents of body cameras are now saying that they're turning against them. and they're saying they're broken because they're not finding all these bad cops, that there's something wrong with the body cameras. I have a different point of view and that is you have to accept the possibility that the vast majority of cops do a good job and they're falsely accused and I think that's what body cameras have proven.公共安全全景、监控争议与数据治理防线
>>: 随后市场开始全面铺开，在全国范围内成了标配。你能谈谈如今公司的业务规模吗？
英文原文
**>>**: And so you get out there, the market starts moving and I'm assuming it just becomes de facto, right? I mean all over the country at this point. I mean maybe you can just share a little bit about the scale of the business today.>>: 弗格森事件后，全美警局都需要记录仪而且急于部署，这凸显了我们押注云端的价值。2010 年时政府对云概念还很陌生，总认为把数据放在眼前的本地电脑里最安全。但在网络安全领域，即便在本地服务器里也可能早被黑客潜入。安全取决于技术架构与运维团队。从第一性原理出发，我们深知云端比普通警察局的本地系统要安全得多，并且具备扩展能力。需求爆发后，如今全美几乎所有大型警局都配备了记录仪，其中绝大多数使用我们的系统。一方面因为我们是先行者，另一方面也源于我们对使命的极致专注。我们有幸能自主选择想要解决的问题，专注于能带来改变、令我们振奋的方向，这带来了完全不同于纯利润导向公司的产品成果。
英文原文
**>>**: Oh yeah. Yeah. Once once Ferguson happened, then everybody needed body cameras and they needed them fast. Uh and that's where our bet on the cloud made a big sense. You remember back in the day like uh you know in 2010 cloud was relatively new to government. And they they they had this perception well if it's here and it's sitting on my computer it's safe because it's here in the room with me, right? I can keep eyes on it. But that's not true. In cyber security there could be Chinese hackers, you know, in the server in my building. No problem. it comes down to the technology and the stack and the people you've got. And so like from a first principles, we knew the cloud could be safer than your average police department. Um, and we could scale it. And so because of the urgency after Michael Brown, then it just really took off. And so today, virtually I think every major police department now where's body cameras. Uh, and we have the vast majority are on our system. I think partly because we were first, but also because we tend to be we're we're sort of maniacally missiondriven. Uh, and I know that always sounds a little bit cheesy, but like we have the luxury of choosing what problems we want to solve. And so we work on things that are going to make a difference, that we're excited about. Um, and that leads to different product outcomes than companies that are just purely profit motivated.>>: 能否谈谈近期公众对监控情绪的变化？比如 Flock 这家公司在城市中安装摄像头，正遭到部分市议会的抵制。大家开始担忧监控国家的出现，担心政府和警方获得这些技术后会构建出全天候监视公民的庞大国家机器，没有人希望生活在那样的环境中。虽然有维护公共安全的理由，但你能如何梳理当前公众的情绪与争议？
英文原文
**>>**: Maybe you could tell us a little bit about what's gone on recently with some of the public sentiment around monitoring. So, there's this company Flock that's been installing cameras in cities and they're starting to get these city councils to reject the cameras and there's this concern about the development of effectively a surveillance state and that government agencies, police forces getting all of this monitoring technology creates a bigger, more powerful state that's monitoring us all the time. No citizens want to have that. And obviously there's the public safety argument, but maybe you could just kind of frame up what's going on with public sentiment right now and these issues.>>: 这是公众对 AI 广泛应用以及摄像头和传感器泛滥的担忧的一部分。这种担忧合情合理，没有人想生活在一个每个公民一举一动都被全程追踪的监控国家。但我们需要客观看待：我们不可能退回到 1950 年代没有摄像头的美国。现实是如今摄像头无处不在，摄像头数量比人口还多，你我的手机上可能有四个镜头，家里有十几个，再加上街头商用摄像头。核心问题在于数据治理：社会在何种机制下向政府共享视频流？政府应如何使用这些数据？我们坚持以社会效益为导向，打造能经得起时间检验的制度。我们也生产车牌识别（ALPR）摄像头，并在安全控制层面进行了深入思考。公众真正反感的是警察滥用权限搜索前女友等道德上不可接受的行径，或是对普通人的全天候行踪监控；而在追踪被盗车辆或调取暴力犯罪现场周边车牌这类场景上，大家普遍认同其合理性。即使像本·乔丹（Ben Jordan）这样富有洞察力的批评者，也并非要求取缔这项技术，而是强调需要健全的防护机制与安全保障。我非常支持霍利（Hawley）参议员提出的监管法案，该法案通过引入指引与监管，既保留打击犯罪的效用，又防范对普通公民的追踪。
英文原文
**>>**: Well, I I think this is part of a larger concern about AI in general and the proliferation of cameras and sensors. Um, and look, it's not unreasonable. Like I don't think any of us want to live in China, uh, meaning, you know, a surveillance state where every citizen is tracked everywhere they go. Um, however, I think there's got to be some nuance here. We can't go back to United States as it existed in the 1950s when there weren't cameras everywhere. The fact is there are cameras everywhere. There's more cameras than people. You know, you and I probably have four cameras just on our cell phones plus, you know, maybe a dozen in our house plus all the business cameras. So really what this comes down to is how we think about data governance. Like how should society under what circumstances should we share those camera feeds to the government? How should they use that? Um I think in general we try to distill things down to simple you know principles about okay what would we be proud that we've built like what would be good for society and if we build that it will be durable and so in the example of cameras um look we build license plate reading cameras too uh I think we've been pretty thoughtful about the the security controls we put in place to try to avoid some of the issues you've seen. Uh what people are really upset about are things like when a police officer can go in and do searches on their, you know, exgirlfriend. Uh like those sorts of things are morally offensive to folks. Or if you could track every American everywhere they go, like we don't want that. But like tracking a stolen vehicle, uh you know, finding uh being able to look up license plates that are around the the the crime scene of a violent crime, people agree that those are reasonable use cases. And even the critics like um I think Ben Jordan has been a very thoughtful critic. I think he kind of started this. Uh he will tell you if you listen to him, he's not saying to get rid of this technology. We just need good guardrails uh and we need safeguards. And so I'm a big proponent uh by the time this webcast actually hits. Uh I think you know we'll be after the election and we'll start to see some some movement in uh federal regulation. Uh, I'm a big supporter of what Senator Holly is doing to introduce guidelines and oversight so that we can get the benefit of this these technologies to fight crime, but safeguards to prevent them from tracking everyday Americans.>>: 你认为大家能理性理解这些吗？人们面对某些事物可以保持理性，但对另一些事物则会产生强烈的本能厌恶。Ring 的超级碗广告因让人们感到整个社区无时无刻不在被监控而引发强烈抵触，还有关于 Flock 摄像头被市政人员违规使用的报道。虽然可以设置防护栏，但这种技术权力的存在及其对隐私的侵犯本身就令人深感不安。你如何看待引导公众从情绪化抗拒走向对防护栏的理性认知？
英文原文
**>>**: Do you think that people get that rationally? Because I've I've noticed some things you can kind of get people to rationalize and you can understand them and other things people just have a very acute emotional response and they're like, "I icky, yucky. I don't want to have anything to do with that." I think Ring did that Super Bowl ad and the the negative sentiment around the Super Bowl ad being it's so creepy that all these cameras are monitoring everyone all over the neighborhood all the time is what really triggered a lot of people. And I think there were stories about flock where these cameras were being used by city employees to look at people when they weren't supposed to be. So you could argue yes, let's put in the guardrails. But the general notion that this sort of technology exists, this sort of power exists, the this sort of privacy infiltration intrusion exists makes people feel really uncomfortable with it. How do you kind of think about changing that sentiment to being one of rational and guardrails and away from the sort of big emotional response everyone's having?>>: 这是社会进步过程中的必经调整。很多人虽然嘴上感到不适，但依然会购买 Ring 门铃，因为在家庭安防以及遭遇盗窃向警方提供证据时它最有效。民主社会的演进正是如此，大家虽有分歧但最终会找到折中平衡，门铃摄像头不可能被判定为非法。Ring 从事件中吸取了教训并建立了严格的防护机制。我们与 Ring 展开了合作，既支持房主在案发后向警方共享视频，又严厉限制警方进行随意调取漫游。摄像头的所有权和控制权牢牢掌握在用户手中。霍利参议员的法案规定了警员个人滥用系统的刑事与民事处罚责任；同时制造商层面也会引入技术限制，例如在检索前必须输入经系统核验的有效案件编号，并引入多方协同授权的双钥匙（multi-key）机制。如果有人想私查前女友，必须找到另一名愿拿职业前途作赌注的警员协同批准。这套安全机制足以打消绝大多数理性公众的顾虑。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. Well, I think part of that's just an adjustment is as society moves forward. Like look, plenty of people still go they they may say, "Boy, that made me uncomfortable, but they go buy Ring cameras specifically because Ring has some of the best technology for a being able to protect your home or if you need to share videos with police because you had a crime at your house." Um, and so I think there is a little bit of uh back and forth which is is normal. Like this is democracy. Like as you move forward, people aren't going to agree on every topic, but over time I think you know we find middle ground. Um, I don't think it's reasonable. I don't think we're going to end up with like making doorbell cameras illegal. Uh, right. But, uh, I think Ring likely learned from that incident. They've they've put really good safeguards in place. In fact, we have uh uh we have a partnership with Ring where we're both very focused on how do we enable homeowners to share Ring camera video if there's a crime committed with the police, but actually make it really hard for people to enable like we don't enable police to just go out and randomly, you know, canvas those videos. There's a ton of privacy work that goes in so that people know these are my cameras. I control how they're used and but if I, you know, I actually had a car stolen from my house years ago and it took me days. I had to get a technician to come download the video from this like, you know, homegrown camera system. It I couldn't get it to the police for days. Uh I have Ring now because I do want to be able to share it if something like that happens. So I I think it it is also a matter of just yes not everybody's going to uh agree with the guardrails but I think policymakers can't just you we have to find the reasonable middle ground. We've got to find reasonable public policy and we've already seen that. I think uh again I was really impressed with Senator Holly's bill is very rational. It's got criminal penalties if police officers individually misuse this for personal purposes. I believe there's criminal and civil penalties and then there's going to be safeguards from manufacturers like us and Flock that are going to require that before you can run searches, you've got to have viable um case codes that we know this is a legitimate case that's somewhere in your law enforcement system. There's two key systems where you've got to have collaboration before you're running searches. So, if you're searching for your ex, you're going to have to find another officer who's willing to put their career at risk before you can do that. Right? those sorts of safeguards I think will get the 90% of people that are rationally paying attention to this to but you're not going to win 100%. Sure, there are going to be some people that are just going to have a fear of this and and but I think you know I've been around this long enough to see those things subside when you when you get good rational safeguards in place.公共安全操作系统、无人机应用与伦理风波
>>: 你们从泰瑟手持电击设备起步以减少警务中的枪械使用，随后发展出执法记录仪，现在则致力于成为公共安全的操作系统。这还涵盖哪些领域？是否类似于 Flock 的业务？你能否介绍一下为了实现这一使命正在推出哪些产品？
英文原文
**>>**: So, I mean, you guys start with the taser handheld device, reduce the use of guns in in policing, move to the body cam, and now you guys have this framing, I believe, on being the operating system for public safety. What else does that encompass? So, is it similar to Flock's business and maybe help explain some of the other products that come out now and in time to realize that mission?>>: 我们的使命是“保护生命”（protect life），专注化解暴力这一核心问题。泰瑟枪的目标是减少警方开枪击毙嫌疑人的次数；执法记录仪旨在降低警力过度使用的风险，同时在警察履行高危职责时保护他们免遭虚假指控。我们已将这套理念全面延展，与 Skydio 达成合作推进无人机应用，最近我们已成为美国这家领先无人机公司的最大投资人。Skydio 制造全自主机巢，无人机可直接从全市的消防局等点位起飞，在几秒钟内抵达现场。这大幅减少了警察为普通警报疲于奔命的负担，使他们专注于重大警情；遇到突发重大事件时，无人机甚至能在 911 接警员录完报警信息前就飞抵现场。关于无人机同样存在公众监管的担忧，因此我们与 Skydio 共同开发了管控机制，例如执法机构可向公众公开无人机任务剖面，让市民了解其具体用途。大多数部门规定无人机不可用于常规巡逻，仅在接到求助呼叫后飞往特定现场提供态势感知。在某些案例中，无人机甚至通过盘旋分散注意力促成了嫌疑人主动投降。我们的核心思路是在连接设备的同时承认滥用风险，并通过设计化解风险，在提升世界安全与保护隐私之间找到最佳平衡。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. So, uh, we our mission is to protect life and we we chose those two words, meaning we focus on violence as a problem that's worth solving. Um, and that means with a taser, our goal is how do we reduce the number of times police actually have to shoot and kill someone. with a body camera. It's how do we reduce the risk of police using too much force and how do we protect them when they're doing this job that is dangerous and risky so that they don't have to worry about being falsely accused of things and then we persist that all the way through. We partnered with um uh Skyo on drones. So in fact uh we recently will have become the uh largest investor in America's leading drone company. Uh, so if you don't know Skyo, they're the guys who build these robotic autonomous docks where a a drone can now be flown from off a fire station anywhere in a city and you can have a drone on scene in a matter of seconds. This is reducing the number of times police have to take resources to go, you know, to alarm calls. So, it allows them to focus on bigger calls. And when there's big events, uh, they're able to get a drone on scene sometimes before the 911 operator has even finished entering the call for service. So that's improving uh the service to the community. Now again, drones are also an area where people would say, well, there are things like how are these being used? How do we have safeguards to know the police aren't, you know, using these uh in ways that the public uh wouldn't want them to? And so Skyo, together with us, we've developed controls. For example, agencies can share their mission profiles with the public. So if the public has concerns, they can see how they're being used. And most agencies have policies where they're not just flying drones around on on patrol missions. They very specifically fly them only to the site when they've been called where somebody is calling for help and you get a drone there quickly. That can help get help you see what's happening. And in some cases they've even flown a drone down and been able to distract or we've had people surrender to drones. So I think the whole idea is across the board of all the things we do um we look for how do we connect these devices together in a way that's going to make us all safer but also acknowledge that yes there are risks of abuse and we should build this in ways that address those risks. We're not going to win everybody's, you know, not everybody's going to agree uh on everything, but we've so far been able to get to a point where we're finding that right balance so that we're using these things to make the world safer and protect privacy uh and find the right balance along the way.>>: 这关乎“需要多少安全以及付出多大代价”的核心争论。对个人而言，安全感提升带来的收益往往不如个人隐私被侵犯的代价那样切肤。这种欧威尔式的顾虑——国家与执法机关掌握了压倒性的力量与监视特权，甚至延伸至对言论的干预，就像电影《少数派报告》中通过 AI 预测犯罪并提前抓捕——引发了公众的思考：为了所谓的安全，我们是否真的愿意承受牺牲个人自由的巨大代价？你认为这种担忧合理还是有所偏差？
英文原文
**>>**: You know, I think there's this great debate on how much safety and at what cost. That I think is what really triggers a lot of people that the benefit to them individually of more safety doesn't feel felt as acutely as the risk or the cost to their privacy or their personal space. this Orwellian idea that the state has so much power that the government that the policing force has so much power that they can effectively if they chose to there may be guard rails but if they chose to they now have such supremacy over the citizens and this Orwellian idea that now the state can determine hey I don't like the speech that you're using or I don't like whatever it might be there's all these reasons why people can feel like there's an infringement of that power of force upon them. It's almost like how far do you take it? Like the movie Minority Report, I think, did a good job exploring this where it's like at what point do you become predictive with AI of crime happening and then you arrest people before they do the crime? And you know, everyone's kind of fantastical ideas become is that really worth the risk? Like do I really want to take on that level of cost to my individual liberties uh to have quote that much more safety? And I think that seems to be the great debate people seem to be having right now. Is that is that a fair characterization or do you think it's a little bit misguided?>>: 这完全是一个合理的辩论，而且正是当下应该探讨的正确问题。找到平衡确实极具挑战性。耐人寻味的是，最渴求这类技术的往往是犯罪率最高的贫困社区。外界常讨论过度执法的隐忧，但很多顾虑多来自富裕社区的纸面推演；当你与每天面对枪支暴力威胁的居民交流时，他们见到警察到来是欢呼雀跃的，他们希望配备这些技术以形成有效威慑。美国在政治光谱上往往陷入简单化的极端：要么把所有人关进监狱，要么彻底取缔警察。这两种方案都不可行。正解在于利用科技形成震慑，从源头上遏制犯罪决策。对犯罪最有效的威慑并非漫长的刑期，而是极高的被捕与被起诉概率。核心课题在于：我们如何在提高破案率的同时，确保不制造出被用来追踪普通人的技术工具。
英文原文
**>>**: No, no, no. I think it's a fair debate and that is the right debate uh to be having and I think but this is hard work, right? Like it's it's finding the balance. And what's interesting, you will find um the people who most want these sorts of technologies come from the poorest neighborhoods that have the highest crime rates. Paradoxically, those are the ones that, you know, people say, "Well, we worry about overpolicing." But when you when you actually go out uh you frankly a lot of the most concerns are coming from wealthy neighborhoods where this is more theoretical. But when you talk to people that are dealing with gun violence every day in their cities, they cheer when the police show up uh and they're the ones who want to have more of this technology so there's deterrence. I mean ultimately I would say this um in America sometimes we we we have these simplistic notions like you know frankly in the political spectrum sometimes there's just lock everybody up or no no no like abolish the police like come on like neither of those are the right solution I think the right solution is how do we uh deploy technology so we deter people from making bad decisions in the first place like the best deterrence to criminal behavior is not long sentences it's a high probability that you will get caught and prosecuted. And then the question is how do we then balance that as well against making sure that we're not building technology that can be used to track everyday people. Uh but those are interesting those are interesting technoethical problems to deal with, right? How do we build the tech to to meet the ethical bar to make the right trade-offs?>>: 确实，我并不生活在暴力犯罪频发的社区，开车穿过旧金山吃了三张超速罚单时，我的第一反应也是“拆掉那些该死的摄像头”。这正是罗伯·亨德森（Rob Henderson）所说的“奢侈信念”（luxury beliefs）。我注意到在 2022 年 6 月，你们宣布计划研发用于阻止校园枪击案的泰瑟无人机后，顾问委员会的部分成员因伦理与隐私担忧投票反对并愤而辞职。你能谈谈这起事件的经过、教训以及该项目是否仍在继续吗？
英文原文
**>>**: You're right. I don't live or work in neighborhoods where I'm experiencing a lot of violent crime. I driving through San Francisco and I got three speeding tickets. I'm like, get rid of those damn cameras. You know, like my reaction is, why are these cameras here? It's what this guy Rob Henderson calls luxury beliefs. I think there was an incident in, and I have this in my notes, in June of 2022, you had some members of your advisory board who quit in protest after you guys announced plans to develop a taser equipped surveillance drone that you were designing to stop school shootings. And I think the board had voted against the project due to ethical concerns and whatnot and privacy concerns. Can you tell us a little bit about kind of that incident? what what you've learned from it and does that project still continue?>>: 这个项目仍在继续推进，这正是他们辞职的原因。当时我感到非常失望。我们当初设立 AI 伦理委员会的初衷，正是为了听取并非支持警察立场的民权团体的意见，这一机制在完善 ALPR 等技术的防护规范上发挥了重要作用。在那个项目上，我们与委员会就“在校园枪击等极端场景下使用配备泰瑟的无人机”探讨了约一年时间。试想，如果现在有人持枪闯入全美任何一栋大楼，我们该如何制止？只能等待持枪警察赶来现场。
英文原文
**>>**: Uh yes, that project is continuing and that's that's why they quit. That was look, life can be challenging at times. I was very disappointed. We we set up an AI ethics board to give us feedback, frankly, from not from pro police people, but from civil liberties groups that are concerned about policing, right? And that's been a very useful function. That's one of the reasons we've got, I think, great safeguards in how we built ALPR uh and other technologies. Now, on this case, um we had been working with them for about a year on the idea that we could have a taser capable drone to be used in extreme circumstances like a school shooting was the the incident there. But today, for example, if you have a person with a gun show up in a building anywhere in America, do you know how we stop them? We got to wait for the police with a gun.>>: 是的，派更多带枪的人进去交火。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah, we send in more people with guns and they have a gunfight.>>: 这简直就像狂野西部，难道这就是我们社会所能做到的极限吗？我们的主张是，与其等待持枪人员进场引发子弹横飞，不如派遣配备非致命武器的小型无人机或机器人先行进入。这是一项关键区别：警察绝不可能手持非致命武器去对抗持枪歹徒，但如果派入无人机或机器人，规则就彻底改变了，我们可以运用非致命武力。无论罪犯是否罪该万死，交火一旦发生总会误伤无辜路人。我们坚信并通过研发证实，通过无人机或机器人远程部署非致命武力符合全社会的最佳利益。但在乔治·弗洛伊德事件后的舆论氛围下，委员会的一些学者成员担心被外界贴上标签甚至遭遇“取消文化”。尽管多位成员私下向我承认这比派全副武装的特警更为合理，但由于政治风险太高而导致了破局。令人自豪的是我们没有轻言放弃，重组了该委员会并更名为“公平与伦理顾问委员会”，吸纳了更多来自受过度执法影响最深的有色人种社区代表。在设计初期直接听取尖锐批评，才能在产品发布前将防护栏内置于架构之中，避免日后陷入被动争论。
英文原文
**>>**: Like this is the wild west, guys. Like, is that really the best we can do as a society? And so, what we're saying is rather than waiting and sending a person with gun to have more bullets flying, we could send in a drone or a robot armed with a non-lethal weapon. This is a key distinction. Like, you'll never get a cop that will take a non-lethal weapon up against somebody with a gun. But if we can send in a small drone or robot, then the the everything shifts. They're like, "Oh, wait a minute. Now I can use non-lethal force." Now, we can argue whether or not the criminal deserves to die. But even there, like anytime you have more bullets introduced, there's innocent bystanders get killed all the time accidentally. And so I continue to believe and we are doing R&D uh on this that using non-lethal force safely deployed from a distance via drone or robot is in everybody's best interest compared to you know having more gunfights in society. Now because the the way that went down uh frankly I think this was post George Floyd some of our advisers were worried about getting cancelled over this issue. Many of them worked in universities and they were already being accused of being pro police. Uh, and so I think there was some personal dynamics. Many of the people on the board privately agreed with me that like you're right, Rick, this is a this is a better solution than what we have today with sending in cops with body armor and assault rifles. Um, but it was too politically risky and it and it blew up. But I'll tell you one thing I'm proud of. We didn't give up. Many companies have now canceled their ethics boards. We dug in. We reconstituted. We still have. It's been rebranded as our equity and ethics advisory council. And frankly, it now has more black and brown voices on it where previously it was more academically focused. Like if you want to talk about the concerns of overpolicing, it is primarily from underrepresented, you know, communities. And one of the criticisms we had gotten from in that whole process was that we didn't have the right people in the room. If you want to talk about again the concerns of overpolicing, it it should be from uh from communities who are most affected. Uh and so you live and you learn. We've we've recalibrated, but we've continued to bring in uh you know, people who have critical views of policing because we think those are important for us to understand their concerns. And by doing it early, we actually learn in many cases we can build safeguards into the product if you listen uh and you do it up front. It's much better for us to do that and hear the critical voices early in design process rather than after we've launched it because then all we can do is sort of argue about things. We we've lost the ability to make significant design changes.人形机器人、十年警务展望与技术制衡
>>: 让我们展望未来十年。未来 12 到 18 个月内，预计有五家公司将在美国商业化发售人形机器人，售价据称在 1 万至 3 万美元之间。未来的警务是否会包含人形机器人及其他类型的机器人和无人机？请描绘一下十年或十五年后，在这些技术加持下社区警务会变成什么样。
英文原文
**>>**: Let's just talk about the future. 10 years from now, I think there's five companies launching humanoid like robots for commercial sale in the next 12 to 18 months that are going to be available here in the US. 10 to $30,000 price ranges have been kind of talked about. Do you think the future of policing involves humanoid robots, other types of robots and drones? give us a sense of a decade from now or 15 years from now what local community policing looks like with all this technology that's coming to market.>>: 警务本质上仍将是一项由人类主导的工作。对他人使用武力的任何决策都必须由人来做出，这是我们不可逾越的红线。针对无人机或机器人的滥用担忧，我们参与的所有机器人系统都将受到严格的人类监督，并引入“多方协同授权”（multi-key）流程。在警员通过无人机或机器人动用非致命武器之前，系统可以设定为必须获得后方管理员的实时协同批准。我们将打造出警务史上最难被滥用的技术体系。如今发给警察一把枪，他们走出大门后你对其使用行为毫无即时控制力，只能事后追责；而未来的机器人系统将支持多方实时的制度化决策，大幅减少失误与滥用可能。无人机的普及会比人形机器人更快更广，但人形机器人也势不可挡。这就是我们重金投资 Skydio 购入近半数股权的原因。我们预判未来几年全美将部署数百万架无人机，由独立初创企业高速迭代并由我们作为专属渠道推向核心市场。无人机和机器人先行抵达现场提供态势感知，有助于做出最优决策并保障所有人的安全。
英文原文
**>>**: Yep. Well, first I would say policing is still fundamentally a human job. Um any decisions about using force uh on another person will be made by humans and that's a that's a bright line for us. So even with the taser drone you and I talked about earlier, part of what we learned from the concern was people are worried about misuse, abuse, how these things will be used. So any of the robotic systems we're involved in will not only have required human oversight, but we're building multi-key processes. So, for example, you could set it up so that before any officer could operate even a non-lethal weapon from a drone or robot, we can set it up so that there's required real-time approval from an administrator. So, we're actually going to be building the least abusable technology in the history of of policing. Like today, you give a cop a gun, they walk out the door, you have no control over what they do with it. You can prosecute them later. These robotic systems will give us the ability to have institutional decisionm with multiple parties in real time which I think will lead to far less uh you know mistakes uh less concerns about abuse and I do believe both humanoids I think drones will be bigger faster. Uh humanoids are coming as well but again that's why we we invested in SkyO. Uh we we bought almost half the company. We we wanted to buy about as much as we could because we're big believers that there's going to be millions of drones uh in the next few years deployed in the US. But we also actually felt in this case it was better for us to leave it as a as an independent company that could move at startup speed and continue to raise and spend capital uh in ways that maybe weren't constrained by being part of a public company. And yet at the same time we've secured the um the exclusive rights. So we will be the exclusive channel into the markets that we care about because we believe that is absolutely going to be one of the biggest parts of the future is drones and robots arriving on scene way before people uh you know have an opportunity to get there and the whole idea is to just let's understand what's happening. Uh let's let's make sure we're making the best decisions possible. Uh and the idea is to keep everybody as safe as we can.>>: 公民面对掌握如此尖端科技的国家机器，如何确认自身自由不会被彻底压制？作为倾向于自由意志主义（libertarian）视角的个体，虽然我明确支持政府保障公共安全的职能，但这种极度集中的强权让普通公民难以自保，万一未来政府利用这种压倒性优势压制异见该怎么办？
英文原文
**>>**: How do citizens feel like they can maintain their individual liberties from being overwhelmed by a state that is equipped with this much technology? I think that's really where I react personally to think about as a more of a libertarian. I'm a big proponent of the role of government being public safety. So, let me be clear on this. But this idea that you're creating a significant concentration of this extraordinary power and it's hard for the citizens to be able to ultimately protect themselves against a government that decides to overwhelm voices and individuals at some point in the future.>>: 我们不妨退一步审视当下的现实。假设警方接到线报称你家中藏有危险重罪犯——现实中警方进错屋搜查的乌龙屡见不鲜。在当下的模式下，全副武装、身穿防弹衣、手持致命武器的多名特警强行破门而入，在肾上腺素狂飙的应激状态下瞬间做出关乎生死的裁决；人类在战逃反应下很难做出理性决策。国家本就垄断了合法的暴力使用权，警员在感到生命受威胁时手里拿的必定是真枪。相比之下，在未来的场景中，警方先派遣的是无人机或机器人，后方由多人团队协同操作，没有身处第一线因恐惧而颤抖扣动扳机的极端生理反应。即使发生误判，使用的也是泰瑟或喷雾等非致命武力，而且操作全过程被自带的摄像头全程记录——要知道如今许多涉警枪击案根本没有录像。我们需要推动执法机构建立独立的文职监督审查机制，确保每次启用机器人系统都接受外部核查。我们绝不希望看到其他领域都普及了 AI 与机器人，而警察却开着 1974 年款雪佛兰、拿着老式无线电出警。法律、监管与司法制衡必须同步演进，使权力的运行始终受到公民与制度的约束。
英文原文
**>>**: Just got to do is take a step back and look in the world as it exists today. So let's imagine, David, that police have got a tip that there's a a dangerous felon in your house. This has happened, right? We've all heard of cases where police go to the wrong house and they're doing an an entry. So today, the way that works, like if they believe that you're a dangerous felon, they may come through the door in your house and you're going to be dealing with multiple officers that are suited up with body armor with lethal weapons in their hands who are going to have to make a life ordeath decision instantaneously while their own adrenaline is surging. Right? Human beings don't make good decisions under the fight or flight. So the fact is the government already has a monopoly on the legal use of force and it's almost uh and every one of those officers has lethal force and I will tell you if they feel their life is at risk the thing in their hand will be a gun. By comparison if those police are going to come into your house imagine a future where if they do have to do this mission and again we can debate about under what conditions they should do it now they're going to be sending in a drone or a robot. So, the operator is going to be a team of people, not just one. It's not going to be a person who's in the fight orflight response, afraid for their own safety, shaking with their finger on the trigger. And if they make a mistake, you're going to get hit with a taser or a pepper spray or some non-lethal weapon. And oh, by the way, the whole thing will be recorded because to even operate these things, you have to have camera systems on them. Many police shootings today are not recorded. And so I think it just comes back to how do we you know we we just need to sort of take a step back and understand how the job is done today and how we can do it in the future that is safer for everybody and then answer legitimate questions about what are the controls in place things like multi-key authorization. Uh we we will work with our customers uh to push hard that every one of them has an oversight function. So anytime one of these robotic systems is used that there's independent civilian oversight and review. Um so I think again this just comes down to it's not an unreasonable concern. These things could be misused. However, we also don't want to I don't want to live in a world where everybody else has robotics and AI and the police are showing up in a 74 Chevy, you know, with an old radio. Like they're going to need enough tech to keep up with the rest of us. And then the laws and regulations and oversight are going to have to evolve, you know, to make sure that we are controlling the government uh as the people uh and that we've got a good judiciary and good balance of power so that they can't do abusive things without, you know, being held accountable.“削减警费”思潮反思与技术乐观主义
>>: 你如何看待当前的政治格局变化，尤其是呼吁“削减警务经费”（defund the police）的民主社会主义（DSA）群体的崛起？如果这类声音进一步进入政坛，未来几年社区与城市会发生什么？
英文原文
**>>**: And what's your view on the shifting political landscape, the rise of a DSA political class today that's calling for defunding the police? And what do you think happens to communities and cities over the next couple of years if and as more of that voice becomes elected?>>: 如果真的全面削减警费，无需实验也能预见那将是灾难性的后果。1968 年加拿大蒙特利尔警方因薪酬纠纷举行罢工，史称“恐怖之夜”，犯罪分子闻讯肆虐导致全城陷入混乱。哈佛大学心理学家史蒂芬·平克（Steven Pinker）在《人性中的善良天使》中便以此为例阐述：运转良好的警力是维系社会的黏合剂，确保大家恪守共同的规则。在弗格森事件后，部分州推进了入室盗窃等行为的除罪化，直接导致严重恶果。
英文原文
**>>**: Well, if you actually defund the police, um, you know, we we will get some social experiments. Uh, I can tell you you don't need an experiment to show what would happen. It will be catastrophic. But, you know, democracies recover. And I'll give you an example. And I think it was in 1968, the police in Montreal, Canada went on strike for no other reason. It was a simple, it was overpay. There was no, you know, there was no George Floyd type situation. This was just a labor relations strike. Uh, and looking back on it, that is now known as the night of terror because criminals heard that the police were on strike and the city went crazy. In fact, Steven Pinker, the Harvard psychologist, who's uh uh sort of famously both liberal but also very rational. He wrote Better Angels of Our Nature, and this is his example on like you need a functional police force because it is the the glue that that holds society together so we have rules that we can all trust we're going to abide by. And so, I hope we don't see major examples of that. We started to see some of that frankly with some states had decriminalized shoplifting as you recall in the post George Floyd and that led to catastrophic consequences where you saw>>: 旧金山市中心被荒废抛弃，我亲眼目睹了这一切。
英文原文
**>>**: downtown San Francisco got abandoned. I've seen it myself. Yeah.>>: 就业岗位流失，经济活动停滞，商业模式崩溃。不过旧金山已经开始纠偏回调。民主社会具备自我修复机制，随着时间推移纠偏力量终会发挥作用。
英文原文
**>>**: Yeah. And then with that you get the jobs flee. You get these uh you know deserts where there's no economic activity because it's just not safe for people to do it. The business models implode. Uh now I think in your example I think San Francisco has already begun to swing the other direction and take corrective action. Um and so I I try to stay out of politics too much. I think you know things things will swing one way or the other but we have corrective mechanisms that over time will uh will kick in. And>>: 非致命化是一项崇高的使命。公共安全是所有社会契约赖以存在的基础，没有安全的保障，任何社会机制都无法运转。恭喜你们的商业成就以及对 Skydio 的投资，未来在技术边界与社会伦理的平衡上依然充满挑战。
英文原文
**>>**: I think non-lethality is a is a great mission. Um I think public safety is critical to the underwriting of all of our other social contracts. without good publica safety. None of the other social contracts work and the systems don't work. And so I think obviously it's an important mission and important work you do. Congrats on on the business on the progress on the SkyO investment. Obviously there's a lot of I think social challenges ahead here uh with this big debate that's going on right now on the limits of that and the limits of technology.>>: 当下充斥着巨大的不确定性。《经济学人》几个月前刚在封面上渲染“AI 导致的就业末日”，几个月后又反转称“AI 将创造数百万岗位”，技术迭代的加速带来了广泛的迷茫。我常对客户说，警务是维系社会秩序的基石，我们需要执法人员挺身而出维护安宁。我是个坚定的技术乐观主义者，深信一二十年后我们将步入一个近乎乌托邦的社会，科技将攻克疾病并解决诸多困境，埃隆·马斯克倡导的普及高收入（Universal High Income）也将成为现实。但在过渡期内我们必须经受住考验，Axon 的职责就是以负责任的方式为警方提供科技武装，建立完善的防护规则，携手平稳度过转型期。
英文原文
**>>**: Well, I'll tell you as well like you know there's there's a lot of uncertainty right now. You know, the Economist, I think four months ago had a cover that you know, the AI jobs apocalypse and then a couple months later there's the hey, wait a minute. No, AI is making millions of jobs. Like people don't know what to think. And we are at this point where the acceleration of technology is leading to massive amounts of uncertainty. And what I tell our customers is like guys, we need you to stay strong. Like policing is might be the glue that needs to hold society together. Hopefully we don't see the sorts of things we're seeing in France right now. this sort of social upheaval, but god forbid if we do, we need the men and women of law enforcement to be ready to stand up and and help us keep order uh as we get through to what I'm I'm a huge optimist. I think 10 20 years from now is going to be a near utopian society. Again, for maybe I'm a little out over my skis, but I think technology is going to cure many diseases, many ills. I think we're going to see, you know, Elon's idea of universal high income will be fantastic, but we may have some difficult moments as we get through the transition.>>: 我们的目标就是帮助警方正确行使职权，并建立有效防范机制，让公众更加安心。里克，非常感谢你抽出时间参加我们的对话，很荣幸与你交流。
英文原文
**>>**: And our view, our role at Axon is like, how do we arm the police for that in a way we'll look back and we'll be proud of the way that we did it to help them do this the right way? Now, I mean, it's going to be perfect, but let's put some good controls in place and and help make people more comfortable that, you know, we're going to we're going to get through this together, okay? Yeah. Well, Rick, I really appreciate you taking the time. I'm glad we got to finally do this. Thanks for joining us on the All-In Interview. It's been great.>>: 非常愉快，随时奉陪。
英文原文
**>>**: Been a lot of fun. Anytime.>>: 好的，各位好友，这又是一场精彩绝伦的讨论。大家对这次访谈反响热烈，听他分享数小时也不觉厌倦。我们高效剖析了关键问题，为大家提供底层事实依据以形成独立见解。大家觉得如何？太精彩了！