爱泼斯坦案与政府透明度
Gavin: 我掌握关于杰弗里·爱泼斯坦的内部信息,以及为什么美国政府不愿更透明。我之所以知道这些,是因为我在政府工作时,会议讨论的不是“我们该如何告诉公众”,而是“我们该告诉公众什么”。所以,我们能得到的最好怀疑,就是知道我们没有被告知真相。
Original English
Gavin: I have inside information on Jeffrey Epstein and why the US government is reluctant to be more transparent. And I know this because when I was working in government meetings were not how shall we tell the public, but what shall we tell the public? So often the best we can get in our skepticism is to know that we are not being told the truth.
主持人: 我认为人们需要知道真相。
Original English
主持人: I think people need to know the truth.
Gavin: 那么,系好安全带。我将告诉你一切,所有美国政府的高级官员都知道你我今天在这里讨论的一切。你曾与地球上最成功、最富有、最有权势的一些人共事。但Gavin,你具体是做什么的?
Original English
Gavin: So put on your seat belt. I'm going to tell you everything and all senior people in the US government know everything that you and I have discussed here today. So you've been behind the scenes with some of the most successful, richest, most powerful people on planet Earth. But what is it you do, Gavin?
Gavin: 我提供保护服务。你知道,就是针对富人或知名人士可能受到的任何形式的攻击。例如,沙特阿拉伯政府获得了一个可以入侵手机的系统,并用它攻击了杰夫·贝佐斯。所以我们的工作就是查明它是如何发生的。
Original English
Gavin: So I do protective coverage. You know, any of the ways that wealthy or prominent people might be targeted. For example, the Saudi Arabian government obtained a system which can get into your phone used it on Jeff Bezos. So our work was to figure out how it happened.
主持人: 为什么一个政府会想要入侵亚马逊创始人的手机?
Original English
主持人: Why would a government want to hack the founder of Amazon's phone?
Gavin: 我稍后会告诉你,但我们在言语和短信方面都不够谨慎,而且你的手机隐私绝对没有任何可行的保护。你对此有任何怀疑吗?
Original English
Gavin: So, I'll tell you in a second, but we're all not as careful as we could be in terms of what we say, what we text, and there is absolutely no protection viable for the confidentiality of your phone. Do you have any skepticism about that?
主持人: 我只是对这个世界的运作方式知之甚少。
Original English
主持人: I just have a lot of ignorance to how this whole world works.
Gavin: 你真幸运。但人类历史上所有的权力中心都会撒谎。有一些例子表明,我们会在事后多年才开始说出真相,比如致癌的石棉和婴儿爽身粉,以及阿片类药物导致十万人死于心脏病。我们也会在大规模疫苗接种中看到这种情况。
Original English
Gavin: Lucky you. But all power centers in human history lie. There are some examples of this where we'll start telling the truth about something, but years later, things like cancer causing asbestous and baby powder, 100,000 people dying from heart attacks from opioids. and we'll see it with mass vaccination.
主持人: 那么,对于我们今天生活的世界,你有什么建议可以避免风险和威胁?
Original English
主持人: So, what advice would you give about how to navigate in the world we're living in today to avoid risk threat?
Gavin: 我有一些核心真理。首先,各位,我有一个小小的请求。我们的节目即将达到一个重要的订阅里程碑,大约有69%的听众喜欢这个节目,但出于某种原因还没有订阅。如果有什么时候你可以帮我们一个忙,如果我们曾以任何方式为你提供了价值,那就是简单地点击那个订阅按钮。这对我自己和我的团队都意义重大,因为当我们达到这些里程碑时,我们会作为一个团队去庆祝。这是你可以做的简单、免费、轻松的事情,可以帮助这个节目每周都变得更好一点。所以,这是我请求你的帮助。如果你点击了订阅按钮,我不会让你失望。我们将继续寻找小方法来让整个制作变得更好。非常感谢你成为这段旅程的一部分。这对我来说意味着全世界。是的,让我们开始吧。
Original English
Gavin: I've got some core truths. So, first of all, guys, I've got a quick favor to ask you. We're approaching a significant subscriber milestone on this show, and roughly 69% of you that listen and love this show haven't yet subscribed for whatever reason. If there was ever a time for you to do us a favor, if we've ever done anything for you, giving you value in any way, it is simply hitting that subscribe button. And it means so much to myself, but also to my team because when we hit these milestones, we go away as a team and celebrate. And it's the thing, the simple, free, easy thing you can do to help make this show a little bit better every single week. So, that's a favor I would ask you. And um if you do hit the subscribe button, I won't let you down. And we'll continue to find small ways to make this whole production better. Thank you so much for being part of this journey. Means the world. And uh yeah, let's do this.
Gavin Debecker 的工作性质
主持人: Gavin,我们有一个共同的朋友,那个共同的朋友昨晚深夜给我发了一条语音留言。这是语音留言的内容。
Original English
主持人: Gavin, we have a mutual friend and that mutual friend actually sent me a voice note late last night. Here is what the voice note says.
Tony Robbins: 我在这个疯狂的时间打电话。我发现你将在两天后,我想是13号,采访我的一个亲密朋友,Gavin Debecker。他是一个非凡的人,一个非凡的灵魂。他来自一个非常艰难的背景。但他从那个背景中走出来,成为了世界上最伟大的安全专家。他设计了用于保护最高法院的系统。几十年前我遇到他时,我的前女友受到了威胁,然后我收到了恐吓信,他在微秒内破译了这些信件,让FBI介入并制止了一切。他所做的一切是非凡的。
Original English
Tony Robbins: I'm calling it this crazy hours. I found out that you're interviewing a dear friend of mine, Gavin Debecker, I think in 2 days. I think on the 13th. He is an extraordinary human being, extraordinary soul. He comes from a a very tough background. But what he's done to move from that background to becoming probably the single greatest security expert in the world. He designed the systems that are used to protect the Supreme Court. I've met him decades ago when there was a threat happening to a former girlfriend of mine and then I was getting threatening letters and he deciphered the letters in micros secondsonds, got the FBI involved and put a stop to it all. It was extraordinary what he did.
主持人: 哇。那是Tony Robbins,以防有人没认出他的声音。
Original English
主持人: Wow. That was Tony Robbins for anyone that didn't recognize the voice.
Gavin: 我认出来了。
Original English
Gavin: I recognize.
主持人: 是的,如果有人没认出来那就太疯狂了。但这让我非常非常好奇,因为他在那里说了许多让我着迷的事情。我想从第一件事开始,他描述你帮助他处理了他生活中的一个个人情况。我想这引出了一个问题,Gavin,你为像Tony Robbins这样的人,为名人,为世界领导人做些什么?你具体是做什么的?
Original English
主持人: the voice. Yeah, it'd be crazy if someone didn't. But it got me incredibly incredibly curious because he said lots of things there that I found fascinating. Um, the first one I'm going to start with is he described you helping him with a personal situation in his life. And I guess this beggets the question, what is it you do for people like Tony Robbins? What is it you do for famous people, for world leaders? What is it you do, Gavin?
Gavin: 我公司的主要职能是反刺杀。所以我们开发和部署反刺杀策略。在刺杀之下,你可以认为是可能发生的最坏结果,还有一些次要结果,比如其他类型的犯罪、声誉破坏、旨在引起焦虑和恐惧的威胁。我们有一个部门负责威胁评估和管理。我们有一个部门负责实际的保护服务。这是最大的部门,意味着实际的物理保护者,他们是体格健壮、年轻有为的人,而不是超重、已退休的二度就业前警察,而是真正受过这个特定领域训练的人,包括装甲车、房屋改造,基本上所有属于预防或阻止身体伤害的努力。所以,我们从事的是预防身体伤害的业务。那么,你多年来为哪些人提供过这些服务?
Original English
Gavin: The main function of my company is anti-assination. So we develop and deploy anti-assination strategies. Under that under assassination which you can consider the worst possible outcome um are lesser outcomes like other kinds of crimes uh destruction of of reputation uh threats that are designed to cause anxiety and fear. We have a division that does assessment of threats and management of threats. We have a division that does actual protective coverage. That's the biggest division, meaning actual physical protectors, fit, young, capable people, not uh retired ex- cops who are overweight and on their second career, but uh you know, people who are who are really trained for this specific field, armored vehicles, modifications to homes, basically everything that fits into the category of preventing uh uh or disrupting uh uh efforts to do tissue damage. So, we're in the business of preventing tissue damage. And who are some of the names that you do this for and have done this for over the years?
Gavin: 我为之服务的所有客户的名字,我从不提及。所以,我不会说谁是客户,也不会说谁不是,因为如果我告诉你某某不是客户,那可能会泄露其他人是客户的信息,或者你听到的某事是真是假。但我可以这样向你描述:如果你挑选出20个你认为属于这一类的人,或者50个,他们中的大多数都是我们的客户。
Original English
Gavin: All of the names that I do it for are uh never spoken by me. So, uh I don't say who clients are and I don't say who they aren't because if I say to you so and so isn't a client, uh that is information that might reveal that somebody else is or something you heard is true or not true. The way I can describe it to you though is to say that it's if you took the 20 people you would assume uh fit into this category or the 50 um most of them are clients.
主持人: 我的意思是,根据互联网上的信息,你之前提到过某些事情,因为这些人曾公开谈论过,或者你曾出现在照片中。
Original English
主持人: I mean according to the internet you sort of reference certain things before because these people have spoken or you know you've been seen in photos.
Gavin: 没错。如果客户指认我,或者我因为在法庭案件中作证而出现,那是另一回事。这不会是我主动透露的。我把自己看作是精神科医生或医生。我不会是那个泄露信息的人。
Original English
Gavin: That's right. If a client identifies me or it happens because I testify in a court case or something that's a different animal. It just doesn't come from I view myself as sort of like a a psychiatrist or a doctor. I wouldn't be the one revealing it.
主持人: 而那些被他人透露的名字包括杰夫·贝佐斯、伊丽莎白·泰勒、雪儿、麦当娜、芭芭拉·史翠珊,以及更多更多的人。从政府官员到皇室成员等等。Tony提到你帮助他处理了他女朋友的威胁情况,并发现那个人并非大家所想,他指的是什么?
Original English
主持人: And some of those names that have been revealed by others are Jeff Bezos, Elizabeth Taylor, Sher Madonna, Barbara Stysand, and many, many, many more. From government officials to royalty, etc., etc. What was Tony referring to when he said that you helped him with a situation with his girlfriend, a threat, found out that it wasn't who people thought they were,
Gavin: 当然,他指的是一个我永远不会透露的案件,我甚至不会承认他是客户。
Original English
Gavin: right? Surely, he was referring to a case I'll never reveal, and I won't even acknowledge he's a client.
主持人: 你甚至不会说他是客户。
Original English
主持人: You won't even say he's a client.
Gavin: 我不会说。如果你从其他来源得知。
Original English
Gavin: I won't say it. if you if you have it from some other source.
主持人: Tony说了。
Original English
主持人: Tony said it.
Gavin: 我理解你的审问完全合情合理,但我就是不说。我不谈论客户。有很多原因,但最主要的是绝对保密。我知道这很奇怪。抱歉。
Original English
Gavin: I I understand your interrogation is makes all the sense in the world, but I just don't say it. I don't talk about clients. There's a bunch of reasons, but most of all, just absolute confidentiality. I know it's weird. Apologies.
主持人: 但我听你谈论过杰夫·贝佐斯的情况。
Original English
主持人: But I heard you talk about the Jeff Bezos situation.
Gavin: 你听我谈论过网络安全和手机的漏洞。贝佐斯的情况有点不同,因为我非常公开地参与其中,但显然是得到了客户的许可,并与客户共同组织的。就像我在法庭案件中作证一样,没有任何秘密。我正在做这件事,但这不意味着我会在所有地方都这样做。
Original English
Gavin: Uh you heard me talk about uh uh cyber security and and the vulnerability of phones. Uh, and the Bezos situation is a little bit different in that I was involved very publicly in it, but clearly with permission of my client and and organized with my client. Same thing as when I testify in a court case, there's no secrecy about it. I'm doing it, but it doesn't mean that I'll then do it everywhere.
主持人: 那么在这种情况下,你确实得到了杰夫的许可,背景是有一家报纸要刊登他与当时还不是他妻子的劳伦·桑切斯有婚外情的消息,你被要求在这种情况下查明发生了什么,并且你成功解决了。
Original English
主持人: And and so in that case where you did have Jeff's permission, the the background context was there was a newspaper that was going to publish that he was having an affair with I think his current wife who wasn't his wife at the time, Lauren Sanchez, and you were called upon in that scenario to figure out what was going on and you were able to solve that.
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yes.
主持人: 你能谈谈那件事吗?
Original English
主持人: What are you able to talk about there?
手机隐私与政府监控
Gavin: 嗯,我会回顾已经公开的信息。这不是我透露的,也不是关于客户的任何信息,而是关于沙特阿拉伯政府的。当时他们刚刚获得了一个名为Pegasus 3的系统,它可以远程入侵你的手机。它不需要任何点击,这意味着你无需确认任何事情,它就能进入。这被称为“零点击漏洞”。它可以在7000英里之外对你的手机进行所有操作,就像你拿着手机在手上操作一样,即使手机关机,它也可以打开摄像头和麦克风。它确实存在,是由以色列人制造的真实技术。沙特王子MBS刚刚获得它,并用它来对付世界各地的一群异议人士。他还用它对付了杰夫·贝佐斯。根据联合国和许多已公开的信息,我们的工作就是查明它是如何发生的。那时,我不知道Pegasus 3是什么,也不知道这个系统是什么。但对你和你的听众来说,一个重要或有用的信息是,如果一个政府盯上你,你的手机隐私绝对没有任何可行的保护。我之所以说无法阻止,是因为即使苹果公司发布新的解决方案,进行更新来修复某个特定的漏洞,世界各地成千上万的人也会立即开始研究下一个漏洞。所以,如果我告诉你,这是一部我们改造过的手机,总统先生,你可以用它进行机密对话,那么一个月后它就没用了。因此,我能够告诉客户、朋友,现在也告诉你和你的听众,市面上有很多声称能保护你电话通话或短信隐私的产品,但没有一个能可靠地工作。这个问题没有可靠的解决方案。
Original English
Gavin: Well, I'll think back to what's already been what's already been public. Uh and it won't be from me. It won't be anything about the client, but it will be about the Saudi Arabian government, which at that time had just obtained a u a system called Pegasus 3, which can get into your phone remotely. It doesn't require a click of any kind, meaning you don't have to acknowledge anything. It can get in. It's called a no click exploit. And it could do everything in your phone from 7,000 miles away that you could do holding the phone in your hand. even if it was off, could turn on the camera, could turn on the microphone. It exists. It's a very real thing made by the Israelis. And the Saudi prince MBS had just gotten it. And he used it on a group of dissident around the world. He also used it on Jeff Bezos. According to the United Nations, according to lots of things that have been public, our work was to a figure it out, figure out how it happened. In those days, I didn't know what Pegasus 3 was. I didn't know what this system was. But the instrumental or perhaps useful thing for you and your audience to know is that there is absolutely no protection viable for the confidentiality of your phone if a government wants you. And the reason I say there's no stopping it is that even when Apple puts out a new solution uh which they do an update uh that you know breaks some particular exploit thousands of people around the world immediately start working on the next exploit. So if I said to you here's a phone and we've modified it and it's great Mr. President here you can use this phone for your confidential conversations. Uh in a month it won't work anymore. And so I I'm able to tell clients and friends and now you and your audience there are a lot of things being offered for sale that you know supposedly protect the confidentiality of your phone calls for example or your texts. Nothing will work reliably. There is no solution to that problem that is reliable.
主持人: 什么都没有。
Original English
主持人: Nothing.
Gavin: 是的。市面上确实有设备出售,各种各样的东西。但现实是,即使某个东西有效,即使我告诉你,这里有一款很酷的新手机可以保护你,它也只能保护你一段时间,因为总有人在不断努力改进漏洞。而且我必须说,人们有些不情愿,甚至有些懒惰。我会把自己列入这个名单,也会把你列入这个名单,即使我不认识你。我们在言语和短信方面都不够谨慎。我有一个亲密的朋友和客户,他发送的每一条短信和每一封电子邮件都会同时发送给他的行政助理,所有人都知道这一点。结果是,这控制并影响了他的行为。所以当你给我发一个我不想在电视上看到的粗俗笑话时,他的反应会不同。他不会说“哦,太棒了”,然后再加上一句。他知道他的助理在另一个房间里会看到这些。所以我们能做的最好的事情就是谨慎言行,不要假装有隐私或保密性,因为它根本就不存在。句号。美国政府入侵了我们所有盟友的手机,包括西德总理、英国首相、法国总统。这是一场一直在进行的游戏,隐私在新世界中根本不存在。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah. There is there devices sold. There's all variety of things. But the reality is that even if something worked, even if I said to you, here's this cool new such and such phone that will protect you, it'll only protect you for a while because there's a constant effort to improve the exploits. And also I have to say people are somewhat reluctant and maybe even lazy. I'll put myself on the list uh and I'll put you on the list without even knowing you. We're all not as careful as we could be in terms of what we say, what we text. And uh I have a dear friend and client who every text and every email that he sends also goes to his executive assistant and everybody knows it. And what happens is it controls and influences his behavior. So when you send me that off-color joke that I wouldn't want to see on television, he responds differently. He doesn't say, "Oh, that's great." And add another topping line on top of it. He because he knows that his assistant in the other room is seeing that. And so the best we can all do is be be watchful what we say and have no pretense of of privacy or confidentiality because it simply does not exist. Period. The US government got into the phones of all of our allies, the prime ministers, chancellor of West Germany, uh prime minister of England, president of France. This is a game that's going on all the time and uh and privacy is just not part of the new world.
贝佐斯手机被黑事件始末
主持人: 为什么一个政府会想要入侵亚马逊创始人的手机?
Original English
主持人: Why would a government want to hack the founder of Amazon's phone?
Gavin: 嗯,再次根据公开信息,亚马逊的创始人也是**《华盛顿邮报》的老板。而沙特人杀害了《华盛顿邮报》的记者卡舒吉**。然后**《华盛顿邮报》开始发行阿拉伯语版。这让沙特人感觉不好。然后他们真的盯上了——我称他为国家元首,他是王子,但他的父亲还活着,实际上是国家元首——但他们真的盯上了MBS**。我认为贝佐斯在这方面是一个对手。此外,沙特主权基金开发了一个亚马逊的竞争对手,叫做N之类的,所以他们对此感到担忧,而且他们还在与亚马逊进行交易,所以他们可以通过查看各个高管之间的短信来获得经济优势。所以这其中有很多很多动态因素。我刚刚与你分享的所有这些事情,都是在卡舒吉被杀以及世界上的西方国家反对他的暗杀团队四处杀人并入侵他们手机的时候,正在发生的高风险事件。
Original English
Gavin: Well, the again from what's been public, the founder of Amazon was also the owner of the Washington Post. And the Saudis had killed Kosoji, who was a journalist for the Washington Post. And the Washington Post then started putting out an Arabic edition. That didn't feel good for the Saudis. And then they really went after the I'll call him the head of state. He's the prince but but his father was alive and was actually the head of state but they really went after NBS. I think uh Bezos was a kind of adversary in that regard. Additionally, the Saudi sovereign fund developed an Amazon competitor called something like N or something like that and so they were concerned about that and they were also doing deals with Amazon and so they could get economic advantage by seeing what the various executives are texting to each other. So there was a lot of a lot of moving parts to that. So all these things I've just shared with you were highstakes matters going on around the time that Kosoji was killed and that the western countries of the world were objecting to this assassination team of his going around and and killing people and and getting into their phones.
主持人: 2019年初,杰夫·贝佐斯公开指责美国小报《国家询问报》试图勒索他,威胁要公布他的私密照片,包括他描述为他与当时的伴侣劳伦·桑切斯的“腰部以下裸体自拍”。贝佐斯写了一篇博客文章,称AMI向他的律师和安全顾问Gavin Debecker的法律团队发送电子邮件,威胁要公布个人照片和短信,除非他及其团队公开声明该小报对他的报道并非出于政治动机。
Original English
主持人: In early 2019, Jeff Bezos publicly accused the US tabloid the National Inquirer of attempting to blackmail and extort him by threatening to publish intimate photos including what he described as a nude below the belt selfie of him and his then partner Lauren Sanchez. Bezos wrote a blog post saying AMI emailed his lawyer and security adviser Gavin Debeca's council threatening to publish personal photos and texts unless he and his team publicly stated that the tabloid's coverage of him was not politically motivated.
Gavin: 是的。《询问报》想让我做的是,他们与我和我的律师就此进行了谈判,让我公开说两件事。我要说这不是出于政治动机,也没有受到外部势力,即沙特人的影响,而且没有涉及黑客行为。我的问题是,你们到底为什么要我特别说这两件事?我当然已经知道答案了,因为有外部影响,而且有黑客行为。他们的要求如此奇怪,以至于我们没有同意。贝佐斯最终在Medium上发表了一篇文章,公开谈论此事,并说:“如果我无法抵抗,那么普通人该怎么办?”最终,那些照片从未被公布。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah. What they wanted me to do, the Inquirer and they negotiated with me and my lawyer over this that I was to go public and say two things. I was to say it was not politically motivated and it was not influenced by outside actors i.e. the Saudis and that there was no hacking involved. My question was, why the hell do you want me to say those two things specifically? And my I already knew the answer, of course, because there was outside influence and there was hacking. Their request for me was so strange that we didn't go along with it. Bezos ultimately wrote a medium post talking about it publicly and saying, "Hey, if if if I can't stand up to this, then where is a regular person?" And ultimately those pictures were never published.
Gavin: 是的。我甚至不会评论那些照片是否存在,因为顺便说一句,他们正在做一件令人着迷的事情。他们有点像在佛罗里达州出售沼泽地,而那块地根本不存在。他们正在勒索一件他们甚至没有的东西。所以这是一种双重犯罪,既是勒索又是欺诈。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah. I can't I won't even comment on whether those pictures exist because they were doing a fascinating thing by the way. They were it's sort of like selling you land in in Florida that's marsh land and doesn't exist. They were doing an extortion on a thing they didn't even have. All right. So it's kind of a double crime. It's an extortion and fraud.
爱泼斯坦案与情报行动
主持人: 这很有趣。我们在这里开始谈论数字通信和那种安全问题,而此时此刻,所有这些爱泼斯坦文件正在被披露,引发了广泛讨论,因为现在我们可以看到3000万份文件,其中许多是人们在不同时间发送的电子邮件。世界上一些最有名的人曾给爱泼斯坦发过电子邮件,现在这些都已公之于众。我想知道你对此事的看法。你一定是从你职业生涯所建立的视角来看待这些事情的,而且你一定有有趣的见解。
Original English
主持人: It's interesting. You know, we we start talking here about digital coms and that type of security with everything that's going on at this exact moment in time with all these Epstein files and there's a big conversation, you know, because now we can see 3,000 3 million documents and many of them are emails that people have sent at different times. Some of the most famous people in the world have sent emails to Epstein and now those are all out there in the public to see. I wondered what your take was on all of this stuff. You must be watching this stuff from like through the lens that you've built your career and uh you must have an interesting opinion.
Gavin: 其中一些我不会谈论,因为我掌握相当多的内部信息,我只是谨慎行事,不越界。
Original English
Gavin: Some of it I I don't talk about because I have a fair amount of inside information and I'm just watchful about not getting near the line.
主持人: 你说的内部信息是什么意思?
Original English
主持人: What do you mean by inside information?
Gavin: 我的意思是,我可能从作为客户的政府机构那里获得的信息,或者我可能因为客户被牵连而获得的信息。例如,我今天早上在来的路上得知,我本人也在爱泼斯坦的文件中。
Original English
Gavin: I mean information that that I might have gotten from uh I'm characterizing it carefully that I might have gotten from government agencies that are clients or that I might have gotten because uh clients were uh were implicated like I learned today for example this morning on the way over here that I'm in the Epstein files.
主持人: 哦,真的吗?
Original English
主持人: Oh, really?
Gavin: 我之所以在其中,是因为有人把我在**《赫芬顿邮报》上发表的一篇名为《自欺欺人走向战争》的文章发给了爱泼斯坦**。所以,有人把那篇文章发给了爱泼斯坦,那是我非常喜欢的一篇文章。这就是我在爱泼斯坦文件中的一个例子,显然我从未见过爱泼斯坦。但我有一些客户和朋友,爱泼斯坦集团曾试图接触他们,但失败了。也就是说,他们试图拉拢他们,但失败了。我给你讲一个故事,当然不会提及那个人的名字。他去纽约见爱泼斯坦,为一家慈善机构募款。爱泼斯坦被视为一个大富翁,但他其实不是,我稍后会告诉你。爱泼斯坦穿着浴袍。他们隔着桌子坐着,就像你我一样。爱泼斯坦说:“嘿,会议快结束了。”他说:“嘿,我要去按摩了。”所以他穿着浴袍。你想去按摩吗?我的朋友透过走廊看到一张按摩床和一个房间,里面有一个非常可爱的按摩师女孩,对吧?穿着按摩师的衣服。所以他碰巧拒绝了。事实上,有趣的是,他碰巧不喜欢按摩,这本身,你知道,很多人会说“是”,甚至可能认为这会改善我与杰弗里·爱泼斯坦的关系,我把他看作是一个有钱人,我正试图从他那里为我的慈善机构筹钱。嗯,如果那发生了,那个人的世界会多么不同。多么不同的人生。因为那个房间里有摄像头,然后最终有音频。一开始没有音频,但后来添加了音频。然后你正在接受手淫,如果我允许说手淫的话,来自一个你甚至没有考虑过年龄的人,但结果她只有17岁,你将余生都陷入麻烦。这就是爱泼斯坦在纽约公寓里发生的大部分事情,包括摄像头,最终还有岛上的音频摄像头和音频。我的看法,当然也是我公开的看法,是存在一场深刻的敲诈勒索行动,可能不止一个政府受益,但至少有一个政府受益。我刚才说他不是亿万富翁,他确实不是亿万富翁。首先,他的收入来源非常可疑。我先告诉你他是什么。他是一个“构建物”。他是一个被创造出来的“构建物”。金钱、财富、私人飞机、私人岛屿、享乐、未婚、年轻女孩,很多东西。所以,他是一个“构建物”。那5亿美元来自莱斯·韦克斯纳,他是一个富有的家伙,拥有或曾经拥有(我不知道他现在在做什么)维多利亚的秘密,他是以色列国的捐助者。5亿美元连同授权书一起转给了爱泼斯坦,让他可以按照自己认为合适的方式使用和投资。这很不同寻常,你知道,我有点富有,但我不会给你寄5亿美元。我要告诉你,你正在做这件事本身就是非凡的,但这可能是这个“构建物”的资金机制。虽然杰弗里·爱泼斯坦是一个真实的名字,他有真实的出生证明,以真实的方式长大,但呈现在世界面前的形象并非真实。它不准确地反映了他是什么样的人。你越深入挖掘这个故事,当然现在人们因为这300万份文件,还有视频和照片,正在做很多事情,那里有很多材料。现在人们对此非常感兴趣,还有更多有待了解。但你知道到底发生了什么吗?为什么世界上会有人说:“嗯,这些内容有些涉及国家安全。这就是为什么有些内容被删节了。”那会是什么呢?为什么在佛罗里达州起诉他的检察官,提供了一项世界历史上最不寻常的认罪协议,在美国历史上更是独一无二的,那就是想象一下,我是一名美国检察官,你犯了罪,你说:“好吧,我认罪,我服刑,但请放过我的会计师,请不要起诉我的妻子,因为她只是递送了东西,她没有参与任何事情。”这些人被称为“未被起诉的同谋”。所以我与你达成协议,我说:“好吧,你坐8个月的牢,我们不会起诉那些未被起诉的同谋。我们不会起诉你的妻子、你的儿子、你的会计师或其他人。”这是一个非常正常的过程,基本上是一个讨价还价的过程。然而,在爱泼斯坦案中,美国检察官与他达成了一项协议,称我们不会起诉“未具名的同谋”。天哪,那是谁?谁是未具名的同谋?未具名的同谋可能是50人,也可能是75人。给予这项“甜心协议”的人后来成为了劳工部长。他当时是佛罗里达州的美国检察官。他被问到:“你为什么给出这项‘甜心协议’?”因为这项协议是荒谬的。未具名的同谋将免于起诉。他说:“我被告知他属于情报部门。”然后他因此不得不辞职。爱泼斯坦身上发生了很多事情,我是说,这太多了,但把爱泼斯坦带入权力世界并让他获得摩根士丹利(我可能记错了,但就是那些大型金融公司之一)工作的人是威廉·巴尔的父亲。威廉·巴尔是爱泼斯坦在监狱中被杀或死亡(取决于你选择的现实版本)时的美国司法部长。所以那里有很多东西,但我不会是史蒂芬你遇到的第一个说这是情报行动的客人。为什么美国政府不愿更透明?其中一些是国家安全。其中一些是,让我们想象一下我们的一个盟友参与了那项行动。所以,存在一种不情愿和疑问。这有点像UFO。公众能否承受?这是这些案件中总是被问到的问题。意思是,如果例如英国在美国境内进行情报行动,以控制参议员、国会议员、有权势的高管、有权势的人物和科学家,公众能否承受?我们能否承受?美国公众能否承受?我个人认为,绝对可以。是的。
Original English
Gavin: Well, I'll think back to what's already been what's already been public. Uh and it won't be from me. It won't be anything about the client, but it will be about the Saudi Arabian government, which at that time had just obtained a u a system called Pegasus 3, which can get into your phone remotely. It doesn't require a click of any kind, meaning you don't have to acknowledge anything. It can get in. It's called a no click exploit. And it could do everything in your phone from 7,000 miles away that you could do holding the phone in your hand. even if it was off, could turn on the camera, could turn on the microphone. It exists. It's a very real thing made by the Israelis. And the Saudi prince MBS had just gotten it. And he used it on a group of dissident around the world. He also used it on Jeff Bezos. According to the United Nations, according to lots of things that have been public, our work was to a figure it out, figure out how it happened. In those days, I didn't know what Pegasus 3 was. I didn't know what this system was. But the instrumental or perhaps useful thing for you and your audience to know is that there is absolutely no protection viable for the confidentiality of your phone if a government wants you. And the reason I say there's no stopping it is that even when Apple puts out a new solution uh which they do an update uh that you know breaks some particular exploit thousands of people around the world immediately start working on the next exploit. So if I said to you here's a phone and we've modified it and it's great Mr. President here you can use this phone for your confidential conversations. Uh in a month it won't work anymore. And so I I'm able to tell clients and friends and now you and your audience there are a lot of things being offered for sale that you know supposedly protect the confidentiality of your phone calls for example or your texts. Nothing will work reliably. There is no solution to that problem that is reliable. Nothing. Yeah. There is there devices sold. There's all variety of things. But the reality is that even if something worked, even if I said to you, here's this cool new such and such phone that will protect you, it'll only protect you for a while because there's a constant effort to improve the exploits. And also I have to say people are somewhat reluctant and maybe even lazy. I'll put myself on the list uh and I'll put you on the list without even knowing you. We're all not as careful as we could be in terms of what we say, what we text. And uh I have a dear friend and client who every text and every email that he sends also goes to his executive assistant and everybody knows it. And what happens is it controls and influences his behavior. So when you send me that off-color joke that I wouldn't want to see on television, he responds differently. He doesn't say, "Oh, that's great." And add another topping line on top of it. He because he knows that his assistant in the other room is seeing that. And so the best we can all do is be be watchful what we say and have no pretense of of privacy or confidentiality because it simply does not exist. Period. The US government got into the phones of all of our allies, the prime ministers, chancellor of West Germany, uh prime minister of England, president of France. This is a game that's going on all the time and uh and privacy is just not part of the new world. Why would a government want to hack the founder of Amazon's phone? Well, the again from what's been public, the founder of Amazon was also the owner of the Washington Post. And the Saudis had killed Kosoji, who was a journalist for the Washington Post. And the Washington Post then started putting out an Arabic edition. That didn't feel good for the Saudis. And then they really went after the I'll call him the head of state. He's the prince but but his father was alive and was actually the head of state but they really went after NBS. I think uh Bezos was a kind of adversary in that regard. Additionally, the Saudi sovereign fund developed an Amazon competitor called something like N or something like that and so they were concerned about that and they were also doing deals with Amazon and so they could get economic advantage by seeing what the various executives are texting to each other. So there was a lot of a lot of moving parts to that. So all these things I've just shared with you were highstakes matters going on around the time that Kosoji was killed and that the western countries of the world were objecting to this assassination team of his going around and and killing people and and getting into their phones. In early 2019, Jeff Bezos publicly accused the US tabloid the National Inquirer of attempting to blackmail and extort him by threatening to publish intimate photos including what he described as a nude below the belt selfie of him and his then partner Lauren Sanchez. Bezos wrote a blog post saying AMI emailed his lawyer and security adviser Gavin Debeca's council threatening to publish personal photos and texts unless he and his team publicly stated that the tabloid's coverage of him was not politically motivated. Yeah. What they wanted me to do, the Inquirer and they negotiated with me and my lawyer over this that I was to go public and say two things. I was to say it was not politically motivated and it was not influenced by outside actors i.e. the Saudis and that there was no hacking involved. My question was, why the hell do you want me to say those two things specifically? And my I already knew the answer, of course, because there was outside influence and there was hacking. Their request for me was so strange that we didn't go along with it. Bezos ultimately wrote a medium post talking about it publicly and saying, "Hey, if if if I can't stand up to this, then where is a regular person?" And ultimately those pictures were never published. Yeah. I can't I won't even comment on whether those pictures exist because they were doing a fascinating thing by the way. They were it's sort of like selling you land in in Florida that's marsh land and doesn't exist. They were doing an extortion on a thing they didn't even have. All right. So it's kind of a double crime. It's an extortion and fraud. It's interesting. You know, we we start talking here about digital coms and that type of security with everything that's going on at this exact moment in time with all these Epstein files and there's a big conversation, you know, because now we can see 3,000 3 million documents and many of them are emails that people have sent at different times. Some of the most famous people in the world have sent emails to Epstein and now those are all out there in the public to see. I wondered what your take was on all of this stuff. You must be watching this stuff from like through the lens that you've built your career and uh you must have an interesting opinion. Some of it I I don't talk about because I have a fair amount of inside information and I'm just watchful about not getting near the line. What do you mean by inside information? I mean information that that I might have gotten from uh I'm characterizing it carefully that I might have gotten from government agencies that are clients or that I might have gotten because uh clients were uh were implicated like I learned today for example this morning on the way over here that I'm in the Epstein files. Oh, really? And here's the way I'm in there is that someone sent Epstein an article that I wrote called Fooling Ourselves into War. And so uh somebody sent that uh article which is an article I really like by the way uh published in in Huffington Post at the time and and um they sent that to Epstein. So that's an example of being in the Epstein files and yet obviously never having met Epstein. But I have a few clients who and friends who the Epstein group made approaches on and failed. Meaning they tried to get them and failed. I'll give you one story without naming the person, of course. He goes to meet with Epstein in New York to ask for money for a charity. And and Epste is perceived as this big billionaire, which he was not, by the way. I'll tell you in a second. And Epste is in a robe. And they're across the desk just like you and I are. And Epstein says, "Hey, um, they're finishing the meeting." He says, "Hey, I'm going to get a massage." Hence my robe. Do you want to get a massage? And through the hallway, my friend can see a massage table and a room and a very cute girl who's the massage therapist, right? Dressed like a massage therapist. And so he happened to say no. In fact, interestingly, he happens to not like massage, which is itself, you know, a lot of people would say yes and might even think it would improve my relationship with this guy, Jeffrey Epstein, who I perceive as this rich guy that I'm trying to get money from my charity. Um, had that happened, what a different world for that person. What a different life. Because in that room is cameras and then eventually audio. It didn't start off with audio, but audio was added later. And then you're getting a hand job, if I'm allowed to say hand job, from somebody who you don't even think about their age, but turns out to be 17, and you are in a world of trouble for the rest of your life. And that's a big piece of what was going on with Epstein with cameras in that apartment in New York and eventually audio cameras and eventually audio at the island. My take on it uh and certainly my public take is that there was a profound uh uh blackmail operation going on to the benefit of probably more than one government, but at least one government. And when I said a moment ago he wasn't a billionaire, he wasn't a billionaire. For one thing, the his earning path is highly suspect. I'll first tell you what he was. What he was is a construct. He's a created construct. Money, wealth, private jet, private island, fun, not married, young girls, lots of things. So, he was a construct. the money uh $500 million of money came from Les Wexner who's a wealthy guy who uh owns or owned I don't know what he's doing now uh Victoria's Secret notator to the state of Israel and $500 million was transferred to Epstein along with power of attorney to use it and invest it in the ways he saw fit. Quite an unusual uh you know I'm mildly wealthy but I'm not sending you $500 million. I'll tell you that the idea that you're that you're doing this is itself extraordinary, but it was probably the funding mechanism for this construct. While it's a real name, uh, Jeffrey Epstein and he has a real birth certificate and grew up in a real way, the picture that is presented to the world is not authentic. It is not accurate to who he was. And the more you dig into this story, which of course people are doing so much now because of these uh 3 million uh documents so far and videos by the way and photographs, there's a lot of material there. The uh it's very interesting to people right now and and and more to be learned. But you know what was actually going on? Why in the world would anybody say, "Well, there are national security implications to some of this content. That's why some things are redacted." What would that be? Why would the prosecutor who prosecuted him in Florida and provided one of the most unusual plea bargain deals in world history and certainly unique in American history which is imagine I've got you I'm a US attorney I've got you on some crime and you say okay I'm going to plead guilty I'm going to serve my time but please let my accountant go and please don't prosecute my wife because all she did was deliver the stuff and she didn't wasn't involved in anything and so Those are called unindicted co-conspirators. So I make a deal with you and I say, "Okay, you go to jail for the 8 months and we will leave the unindicted co-conspirators unindicted. We won't prosecute your wife, your son, your your accountant or what have you." That's a very normal process. It's it's a it's a bargaining process, basically. However, in the Epstein case, the US attorney gave him a deal that said uh that we would not prosecute unnamed co-conspirators. Holy Who's that? Who's unnamed co-conspirators? Unnamed co-conspirators could be 50 people. It could be 75 people. The guy who gave that sweetheart deal became the secretary of labor. He was at that time the US attorney for for Florida. He was asked, "Why did you give that sweetheart deal?" Because the deal is ridiculous. Unnamed co-conspirators will be exempt from prosecution. And and he said, "I was told he belonged to intelligence." and then he had to resign because of this. There was a lot going on with with with Epstein uh the person who I mean there's so much of this but the person who uh sort of brought Epstein into the world of power and got him his job at I think Morgan Stanley I could have that wrong but one of those big finance companies was William Bar's father. William Bar was the attorney general who was the US attorney general when Epstein was killed or died in prison depending on your choice of of reality. So there's so much there but I won't be the first guest Steven that you've had uh that says that um it was an intelligence operation. Why the US government is reluctant to be more uh transparent? Some of it is national security. Some of it is, let's imagine an ally of ours, uh, is involved in in that operation. So, there's a reluctance and there's a question. It's a little bit like UFOs. Could the public handle it is the question that's always asked in these cases. Meaning, could the public handle it if, for example, the UK was running an intelligence operation inside the United States to control senators and congressmen and powerful executives and powerful figures and scientists? Could we handle it? Could the US public handle it? My take personally, absolutely. Yes.
主持人: 那么,你认为他是一个情报资产,听起来你认为他可能是美国盟友的情报资产?
Original English
主持人: So, you believe that he was an intelligence asset and it sounds like you believe he was an intelligence asset potentially by a US ally?
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yes.
主持人: 那么,那个盟友是谁?
Original English
主持人: So, who is that ally?
Gavin: 以色列。
Original English
Gavin: Israel.
主持人: 你认为爱泼斯坦是以色列的情报资产吗?
Original English
主持人: You believe that Epstein was an Israel intelligence asset?
Gavin: 是的,是的,我确实这么认为。而且,吉斯莱恩·麦克斯韦尔,只是作为额外的背景信息,但每个人都可以找到。她的父亲是以色列的情报资产,备受尊敬。他的葬礼在以色列举行,首相,我想是过去四五位首相,以及所有在世的摩萨德负责人,都出席了。悼词中使用了这样的词语,比如“他为以色列做了世界永远不会知道的事情”。那里有很多很好的联系,很多很好的关联。其中一些我已经和你分享了,因为它们是公开的,有些我没有分享,但这确实是我所相信的。是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yes. Yes, I do. And uh and Glain Maxwell, just for additional background, but everybody can find it. Her father was an Israeli intelligent asset who was so revered. His funeral ceremony was held in Israel, was attended by the prime minister, by I think the last four or five, by every living head of Mossad attended. And there were words used in eulogies like he did things for Israel that uh the world will never know about. There's a a lot of good connection there and a lot of good connective tissue. Um, some of which I've shared with you because it's public and some of which I'm not sharing, but that is uh that is indeed what I believe. Yes. And
主持人: 不仅仅是我,顺便说一句。你可能已经知道了。而且你肯定还有另一位嘉宾坐在这里,一位前CIA特工,Kira Cow,你如何称呼他的姓氏?
Original English
主持人: not just me, by the way. I you might already be there. And you've certainly had another guest sit here and and uh former CIA guy uh Kira Cow, how do you say his last name?
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah.
主持人: 我说得接近吗?
Original English
主持人: Uh am I close to
Gavin: 你很接近了。比我能说得更接近。
Original English
Gavin: You're close. It's closer than I would get.
主持人: 好的,很好。他直言不讳地说是以色列。所以没有直接证据。但人们基本上是在把碎片拼凑起来,形成一幅画面。
Original English
主持人: Okay, good. And he was point blank in saying Israel. So there's no there's no direct evidence. But what people are essentially doing is putting the pieces together to make a picture.
Gavin: 有直接证据。只是我此刻没有分享直接证据。但已经有很多公开的证据,其中一些我已经分享了。我的意思是,我可以讲40分钟,但每个人都可以去问ChatGPT。你知道,如果你问ChatGPT,为这件事提供最好的论证。对于观众来说,记住这一点很好。为……提供最好的论证,无论是什么。如果你问,你得到的第一个答案,如果你问一个直接的问题,总是官方叙述。
Original English
Gavin: There is direct evidence. There's just not direct evidence I'm sharing at this moment. But there's the there's plenty of evidence that that has been public already, some of which I've shared. I mean, I could I could do it for 40 minutes, but everybody can just go to chat GPT. And you know, if you ask Chad GPT, make the best case for this. A good thing for viewers to remember. Make the best case for dot dot dot whatever it is. If you ask the first answer you get if you ask a straight question will always be the official narrative.
主持人: 我正是这样做的,因为你说了。我问ChatGPT,为爱泼斯坦是以色列间谍提供最好的论证。它是这样说的:杰弗里·爱泼斯坦作为以色列情报资产的案例,是基于模式吻合而非直接证据。他进行了一项性勒索行动,类似于已知的情报“妥协材料”策略。
Original English
主持人: I've done exactly that because you said it. I I asked Chi make the best case for Epstein being an Israel spy. Here is what it said. The case that Jeffrey Epste functioned as an Israeli intelligence asset rest on a pattern alignment rather than direct proof. He ran a sexual sexual compromise operation resembling known intelligence compromat tradecraft.
Gavin: 妥协材料。是的,就像一个俄语词,意思是“我们让你妥协”。
Original English
Gavin: Compromat. Yeah, like it's a Russian word that means we compromise you.
主持人: 他的财富和人脉远超他的正式职业,多年来享有不寻常的法律保护。他与吉斯莱恩·麦克斯韦尔的密切合作,后者父亲有记录在案的情报联系,以及记者报道称爱泼斯坦的活动在情报相关圈子中被讨论,都加剧了怀疑。他公寓和家中的隐藏摄像头和麦克风。我们怎么知道它们在那里,为什么?
Original English
主持人: Had wealth and access far beyond his formal career and operated with unusual legal protection for years. His close partnership with Gla Maxwell, whose father had documented intelligence ties fuel suspicion, as does reporting by journalists who say Epstein's activities were discussed in intelligence adjacent circles. The cameras and the microphones hidden in his apartment and his home. How do we know they were there and why?
Gavin: 嗯,我知道它们在那里的方式与其他人知道的方式有点不同。我对FBI的整个历史了解不多,但我会告诉你FBI一个有趣的部分。当他们在他最近被捕后去执行那间公寓的搜查令时,他们发现甚至拍摄了一堆贴有标签的CD-ROM或某种光盘,但他们没有拿走。他们说:“我们会拿到搜查令,然后回来取。”他们仅仅六天后就回来了,但一切都消失了。所以它们在哪里,我不知道。美国政府有吗?还是其他人有?我就是不知道答案。但我从关于岛屿和公寓的非常直接的信息中得知。我不知道新墨西哥州的情况。我只是碰巧不知道。他拥有的另一所房子里有摄像头,然后最终有音频。音频是后来添加的。哦,顺便说一句,还有证词。那些在那里工作和经常去那里的女孩作证说,在前门右侧的一个小房间里,有一整套视频,录像就是在那里进行的。
Original English
Gavin: Well, how I know they were there is a little bit different from how everybody knows they were there. And I don't know enough about the entire history of the FBI piece, but I'll tell you a funny part of the FBI piece. When they went to execute a search warrant at that apartment after his more recent arrest, they found and even photographed a bunch of CDROMs or discs of some kind that were labeled, but they didn't take them. They said, "We'll get a warrant and we'll be back for those." and they came back after a mere six days and it was all gone. So where it is, I don't know. Does the US government have it? Does somebody else have it? I just don't know the answer. But I know from very direct information regarding the island and the apartment. I don't know about New Mexico. I just don't happen to know. Another house that he owned that there were cameras and then eventually audio. Audio was added. Oh, also testimony, by the way, pardon me. testimony from girls who said girls who worked there and visited there a lot who said that in a small room near to the right of the front door was a whole thing of videos where the recording was done.
主持人: 你能向我解释一下,为什么录制人们做那些事情的视频和音频,对这个外国对手来说会是一个有用的资产?
Original English
主持人: And can you explain to me why recording videos and audio of people getting those kinds of uh doing those kinds of things would be a useful asset for this foreign adversary to have.
Gavin: 当然。你知道,勒索不总是通过打电话给你说:“嘿,史蒂芬,如果你不做A、B或C,我就会以某种方式伤害你。”另一种方式要好得多,甚至在一些现在发布的材料中也有暗示,那就是他打电话说:“史蒂芬,我有个坏消息。你还记得你和辛迪按摩过吗?你知道那个女孩,辛迪?”“哦,是的。是的,我记得。”“嗯,她录了一些东西。她包里有东西。她做了录音。我还有更坏的消息,史蒂芬,那个女孩16岁半。”现在,顺便说一句,你胃下沉,腹泻。你现在听到这些就陷入了巨大的压力中。而他,不是你的勒索者,而是你的救星。他说:“我能处理。我能处理。我能处理。她有录音。我不知道它们在哪里,但我能处理。我能处理。我能处理。别担心。别担心。别担心。”他现在拥有你了,永远。如果你与未成年人发生过裸体接触,并且有视频和音频记录,你就会做任何被要求做的事情,只要在合理范围内。很少有人会像你描述的贝佐斯那样有勇气和毅力,他写了一封公开信说:“前几天我遇到了一件非常不寻常的事情。我被**《国家询问报》**勒索了。”这就是他们所说的。这非常非常罕见。所以,你知道,一个参议员,一个国会议员,他拥有很多人。你对此有任何怀疑吗?
Original English
Gavin: Sure. Uh, you know, blackmail is not always done by calling you up and saying, um, you know, hey, Stephen, I'm going to hurt you in the following way if you don't do A, B, or C. The other version is is far better, which there's is even alluded to in some of the now released material, which is he calls and he says, "Stephen, I've got terrible news. Do you remember you had that massage from Cindy? You know that girl, Cindy?" "Oh, yeah. Yeah, I remember." Well, she recorded something. She had something in her bag. She made a recording. And I got worse news. Stephen, the girl's 16 and a half. And now, by the way, you are stomach drops, diarrhea. You are in a world of stress right now just hearing that. And he, instead of being your blackmailer, becomes your rescuer. He says, "I can handle it. I can handle it. I can handle it. She's got the recordings. I don't know where they are, but I can handle it. I can handle it. I can handle it. Don't worry. Don't worry. Don't worry." And he owns you now. forever. If you were involved in a naked experience with someone who's underage, and there's a video of it and audio of it as well, you will do anything that you are asked to do that is within reason. Very few people would have the character and the stamina to do what you describe Bezos doing, which is that he wrote a public letter saying, "A very unusual thing happened to me the other day. I'm being blackmailed by the National Enquirer." and here's what they said. That's very, very rare. And so, you know, a senator, a congressman, he owned a lot of people. Do you have any skepticism about that?
主持人: 我没有怀疑。我只是对这个世界的运作方式知之甚少。
Original English
主持人: I don't have skepticism. I just have a lot of ignorance to how this whole world works.
Gavin: 你真幸运。
Original English
Gavin: Lucky you.
主持人: 我只是对这些事情知之甚少,你知道,因为你几乎只在电影里听到这些。而且,呃,看起来我们都在亲眼目睹一些我们可能只在电影中看到的事情。甚至当你知道我看到一些爱泼斯坦发给别人的电子邮件出现在我的信息流中时,他似乎一直在以一种相当不寻常的方式邀请人们出去玩。现在也许我只是一个内向的人,但我不是。他,他就像在与人沟通时很积极,他说:“来和我一起玩吧。我正在这个晚宴上做这件事。来我的岛上。你在附近吗?”他成功地让很多人来参观他的家和他的岛。是的,呃。
Original English
主持人: And I just have a lot of ignorance to like, you know, because you hear about these things in almost like movies. And uh it appears that we're all kind of witnessing something we might have regulated just to the movies happened before our eyes. And even when you know I saw some of the emails coming up on my feed of things that Epstein had emailed people, he seemed to be continually inviting people to hang out with him in a way that is quite atypical. Now maybe I'm just an introvert, but I'm not. He he was like aggressive in his coms to people saying, "Come and hang out with me. I'm doing this thing at this dinner party. Come to my island. Are you in the area?" and he was succeeding in getting a lot of people to come and visit his his homes and his island. And yeah, it's uh
Gavin: 顺便说一句,史蒂芬,在你今天所处的境况下,你很可能也曾收到过杰弗里·爱泼斯坦的邀请。你很可能也有认识你的人说:“嘿,纽约有个人,很喜欢你的节目。太棒了。”然后突然之间,你就收到了那个邀请。而且你是通过你认识的人收到那个邀请的,有点像。
Original English
Gavin: by the way, Stephen, in the circumstance you are in today, you might well have heard from from Jeffrey Epstein. You might well have had somebody who knows you who says, "Hey, there's this guy in New York. Loves your show. Uh just terrific." And and all of a sudden, you're getting that invitation. And you're getting that invitation through someone you know and kind of like
主持人: 就像乔·罗根那样。
Original English
主持人: like Joe Rogan did.
Gavin: 我不知道。但很多人都这样。嗯,乔·罗根说了。
Original English
Gavin: I don't know. But like so many people. Well, Joe Rogan said it.
主持人: 哦,如果他已经公开了,我就不说了,但我明白了。
Original English
主持人: Oh, if he's been public about it, I'm just not going to be the one to say it, but I I got it.
Gavin: 哦,好的。是的。乔·罗根上周公开说,而且文件里也有,他节目的一位前嘉宾,我想是劳伦斯·克劳斯,邀请他去见杰弗里·爱泼斯坦。电子邮件显示杰弗里·爱泼斯坦试图让劳伦斯把乔·罗根带进来。乔·罗根说,绝对不。
Original English
Gavin: Oh, okay. Yeah. Joe Rogan publicly la last week said that, and it's in the files, that a former guest, I think it was Lawrence Krauss of his show, invited him to come and meet Jeffrey Epstein. And the emails show that Jeffrey Epstein was trying to get Lawrence to bring Joe Rogan in. Joe Rogan said like absolutely abs well this what Joe Rogan's said absolutely not,
主持人: 对吧?
Original English
主持人: right?
Gavin: 而且对此感到毛骨悚然,从未去过,也从未参与。嗯,我刚才想说的是,在你目前的情况下,你知道,这个节目有庞大的观众群和影响力,以及你所有的工作,那些小视频等等。嗯,你当然是一个很棒的人,因为现在我可以打电话给你说:“嘿,你能请这个人来吗?”或者我可以问:“嘿,你对这个话题能非常怀疑吗?你会说‘我不相信’吗?你会说‘我认为这是错的’吗?或者你会说‘我认为这是反犹太主义’吗?或者你会说这样那样的话吗?”兄弟,你会的。我开始真正理解敲诈勒索角度的那一刻,是我开始阅读爱泼斯坦发给自己的一些特定电子邮件的时候。
Original English
Gavin: And was creeped out about it and never went and was never involved. Well, the point I was just making is that in your present circumstance with the, you know, enormous audience and and the reach of this show and and all your work, the small videos, etc. Um, of course you're a terrific person because now I can call you up and say, uh, hey, will you have this person on? Or I can say, hey, will you be really skeptical about this topic and will you say, I don't believe it. And will you say, I think it's wrong or will you say, I think it's anti-semitism or will you will you say such and such? And brother, you will. the the moment where I started to, you know, really understand the blackmail angle um was when I started reading some of the particular emails that Epstein had sent to himself.
主持人: 其中有一封是他发给自己的关于比尔·盖茨的电子邮件。他声称比尔·盖茨与人发生过性关系。他发给自己一封电子邮件。
Original English
主持人: One in particular where he sent himself an email regarding Bill Gates. He's alleging that Bill Gates has slept with He's sending himself an email.
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yes.
主持人: 声称比尔·盖茨与某个俄罗斯妓女发生过性关系,而且他得了性病,有婚外情,所有这些指控。当我读到那封电子邮件时,我当时就想,哦,你知道,他是一个勒索者。
Original English
主持人: Alleging that Bill Gates has slept with someone, some some Russian prostitute, and that he got an STD, an extrammarital affair, all of these allegations. And when I read that email, um, then I thought, oh, you know, he he was a black mailer.
Gavin: 他绝对是一个勒索者,他收集了所有这些富人和名人,现在他们都在他的掌控之中。
Original English
Gavin: He was definitely a black mailer and he's collected all these rich and famous people and he has them in his pocket now.
政府谎言与社会控制
主持人: 那么,在我们继续之前,就爱泼斯坦这一点做个总结,你说他们公布了一些文件,但还有一些文件没有公布。是的。你暗示那是因为他们基本上不能公布这些其他文件。
Original English
主持人: Just to close off then on this uh point of Epstein before we move on, you said they they've released some of the files and you said they hadn't released other files. Yes. And you have implied that was because they basically can't release these other files necessarily.
Gavin: 嗯,我不知道,我认为还会有更多。我认为还会有更多文件被公布,但肯定有一些文件,包括现在甚至昨天的一些文件,尽管有法律规定。你知道,国会投票通过了一项法律,要求公布所有未删节的文件。嗯,仍然有很多被删节的内容。所以,还会有更多。而且,嗯,会有一些被删节吗?当然。会有人像我今天这样坐在这里说:“嗨,我是某某部长,让我告诉你到底发生了什么。你知道,我是CIA负责人,让我告诉你到底发生了什么。”不太可能。
Original English
Gavin: Well, I don't I don't know what I think more is coming. I think more will be released, but there are certainly files, including files even right now, even yesterday, though there's a law. Uh, as you may know, Congress voted for a law to release everything unredacted. Um, there's still a lot of redacted stuff. So, there's more to come. And, uh, will some be redacted? Sure. Is anybody going to sit here like I did today and say, "Hi, I'm the secretary of blah blah blah, and let me just tell you what was really going on. Uh, you know, I'm the head of the CIA, and let me tell you what was really going on." Not likely.
主持人: 但特朗普知道。他知道杰弗里·爱泼斯坦到底是谁。
Original English
主持人: But Trump knows. He knows who Jeffrey Jeffrey Epstein really was.
Gavin: 我会说美国政府所有高级官员以及许多普通人都知道你我今天在这里讨论的一切。
Original English
Gavin: I would say all senior people in the US government and and many many people in general know everything that you and I have discussed here today.
主持人: 不是秘密。顺便说一句,你觉得呢?假设有人站出来说,这个国家被描述为我们最伟大的盟友。我会说我们最伟大的盟友是英国,嗯,基于历史。但是,嗯,以色列是中东地区一个重要的盟友,它是一个民主国家,它更像是一个西方政府。我明白了。嗯,但你觉得呢?这个国家站出来,有人正式说:“好吧,让我告诉你到底发生了什么。”你认为美国公众能承受吗?
Original English
主持人: No secret. By the way, what do you think? Let's imagine somebody came forward and said this country described as our greatest ally. I would say our greatest ally is the UK uh based on on history. But, uh, Israel is an important ally in the Middle East and it's a it's a democracy and it's more of a western government. I get it. Um, but what do you think? The the the country comes out and somebody officially says, "Okay, let me tell you what was going on." Do you think the American public can handle it?
主持人: 我认为无论如何,他们现在都应该知道真相。他们能否承受,可能次要于他们是否应该知道。我认为人们需要知道真相。我认为问题在于人们已经被所有这些事情部分地创伤了,所以现在我认为补救措施是完全透明。
Original English
主持人: I think they either way now deserve to know the truth. Whether they can handle it or not is probably secondary to whether they I think people need to know the truth. We've I think like the problem is people have been like partially traumatized by all of this stuff and so now I think the remedy is full transparency.
Gavin: 我同意,顺便说一句,这很接近,因为我们得到了很多信息,而你知道,五周前或八周前,人们还在说:“哦,没什么了,就这些了。”我的意思是,这是一个很大的进步,我认为这是一个很大的进步,是我一生中见过的政府在透明度方面迈出的最大一步。例外情况是,如果不是政府,埃隆在收购Twitter后所做的事情,Twitter文件的发布。那是一件非常令人印象深刻的事情,让三名记者进来,查看所有文件。我认为如果美国政府能这样做,那将是太棒了,政府不经常这样做,但如果他们说:“好吧,各位,系好安全带。我将准确地告诉你们肯尼迪总统遇刺案的真相,或者罗伯特·F·肯尼迪参议员竞选总统时遇刺案的真相。”在美国历史上有一些这样的例子,感觉大约25年后,我们才会开始说出一些事情的真相。50年前,强生公司去了FDA,他们说:“看,我们的婴儿爽身粉,你知道,你给婴儿用,你吸入,母亲也吸入的东西。嗯,它含有石棉,会致癌。”FDA说:“嗯,谢谢你们提请我们注意。我们将开始研究多少石棉是允许的量。”现在,他们从未考虑过零,而这正是我希望我的婴儿或你的婴儿能得到的。他们开始研究,然后研究了一段时间,又研究了一段时间,结果40年过去了,他们还没有发布裁决说强生婴儿爽身粉中不应该含有任何石棉。顺便说一句,他们是什么时候发布这个裁决的?去年,2024年底,在52年之后。所以一开始政府说石棉?不,你在说什么?橙剂也是同样的故事。橙剂是越南战争中用于落叶的材料,伤害了人们,杀死了人们,并导致他们的孩子出生缺陷,包括美国士兵,很多人。政府知道这一点,他们已经在40只实验鼠身上进行了测试,实验鼠通常寿命不长,但在这个案例中,38只在5天内死亡。政府对这些信息做了什么?哦,把它放进绝密文件里,然后销毁。然后它就搁置了很长很长一段时间,医学研究所说:“橙剂伤害人?你在说什么?”不。他们撒谎,他们撒谎,他们撒谎,然后终于20、25年后,好吧,是的,对不起,我们错了。它确实会导致出生缺陷。你会在乳房植入物、硅胶乳房植入物上看到同样的故事。你会在婴儿配方奶粉、含有砷的婴儿食品上看到同样的故事。我不想让婴儿食品中含有任何砷,但他们否认、否认、否认、否认,我们会在大规模疫苗接种中看到这种情况,因为几年后,他们会说:“好吧,是的,它很有可能导致心肌炎(顺便说一句,这已经被承认了)、心包炎,呃,年轻人的癌症,这是一个糟糕的产品,对不起。”但他们不会在一年前做,而且他们显然,正如我们每天都能看到的,他们不会在五年后做。当美国政府或任何权力中心撒谎时,很容易就能看到和找到。我是一个美国人。我完全支持美国。但人类历史上所有的权力中心都会撒谎。然而,知道他们在撒谎并不能告诉你真相。意思是,知道奥斯瓦尔德并非独自一人从德克萨斯州图书仓库六楼开枪,如果他根本就是枪手的话。知道这一点并不能告诉你谁是枪手。所以,我们能得到的最好怀疑,就是知道我们没有被告知真相。当我长大时,我感到我非常天真,不了解世界真正运作的本质。我做的播客越多,坦率地说,你知道,你被邀请参加有趣的事情,你遇到富人、名人和亿万富翁。我今年去了达沃斯,我认为人们认为这让我成为某种,我不知道,如果达沃斯有光明会,他们没有邀请我进入那个房间。但我看到了真正有权势的人和世界领导人等等。我坐在这里采访了那么多CIA间谍,我了解到有一些事情正在暗中进行。所以,普通人在生活中所持有的现实版本,你过去几十年的工作如何改变了你对实际存在的现实版本的看法?它们有什么不同?
Original English
Gavin: I agree and by the way uh this is close uh because we we got a lot of information whereas you know 5 weeks ago or or eight weeks ago people were saying oh there's nothing more that's it that's all there is. I mean, this is a big step and I think it's a big step as big a step toward transparency as uh probably as I've seen in my lifetime by a government. The exception would be if it's not a government what Elon did after buying Twitter, the release of the Twitter files. That was a very impressive thing of letting three journalists come in and just go through everything. I think it would be awesome if the US government ever, Governments don't do this very often, but if they ever said, "Okay, everybody, put on your seat belt. I'm going to tell you exactly what happened with the JFK assassination or exactly what happened with the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, when he ran for president." There are some examples of this in US history where it feels like after about 25 years, we'll start telling the truth about something. 50 years ago, Johnson and Johnson went to uh to the FDA and they said, "Look, our baby powder, you know, that stuff that you put on the baby and you breathe and the mother breathes. Well, it's got asbestous in it and it causes cancer." And the FDA said, "Well, thanks for bringing this to our attention. We'll begin to study how much asbestous is an allowable amount." Now, they never considered zero, which is what I'd want on my baby or you'd want on your baby. and they began to study and then they studied for a while and they studied for a while and lo and behold 40 years had gone by and they hadn't come out with a ruling to say there shouldn't be any asbestous in in Johnson and Johnson baby powder when did they come out with that ruling by the way last year end of 2024 after 52 years. So at the beginning the government is saying asbestous no what are you talking about Agent Orange the same story Agent Orange material used in Vietnam for defoliation uh hurt people killed people and caused birth defects in their kids including American soldiers lots of them the government knew it they had tested it on 40 lab mice and lab mice don't have a good life generally anyway they don't have good life expectancy but in this case 38 died within 5 days what the government do with that information? Oh, put that in a top secret file and get rid of that. And then it sits for a long, long time and the Institute of Medicine says, "Agent Orange hurting people. What are you talking about?" No. And they lie and they lie and they lie and then finally 20 25 years later, okay, yeah, sorry, we were wrong. It does it does cause birth defects. You see that same story with uh breast implants, silicone breast implants. You see that same story with uh baby formula uh with baby food which has arsenic in it. I don't want any arsenic in baby food but deny deny deny deny and we'll see it with mass vaccination because after some years there will be okay yes there is a good chance that it causes myocarditis already been admitted by the way pericarditis uh cancer in young people it it was a bad product sorry but they won't do it a year away from a thing and they obviously as we can see every day they won't do it five years away it's very easy to see and to locate when the US government or any power center. This is I'm an American. I'm all for America. But all power centers in human history uh lie. Knowing that they are lying does not tell you the truth, however. Meaning knowing that Oswald did not act alone as a shooter from the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository, if he was a shooter at all. Knowing that does not tell you who was the shooter. So often the best we can get in our skepticism is to know that we are not being told the truth. When I grew up, I felt I feel like I was very naive to the nature of how the world really operates. And the more I've done podcasts and frankly, you know, you you you get invited to interesting things and you meet like rich people and famous people and billionaires. And I went to Davos this year, which I think people think makes me some kind of like I don't know, I wasn't if there was if the Illuminati at Davos, they didn't invite me into that room. But I got to like I got to see like really powerful people and world leaders and all those kinds of things. And I've sat here and interviewed so many CIA spies and I've learned that there are things going on out of plain sight. So the version of reality that the average person has as they go through their life, how has the work you've done over the last several decades of your career shifted your belief about the version of reality that actually exists? Like how how are they different?
Gavin: 我可以轻松回答,因为我以前也和你一样。我会说我很天真。事实上,顺便说一句,我想快速承认,即使你听到了这些,我今天可能仍然很天真,因为可能存在比我所看到的更高层次的现实,或者我选择不去看。我可以告诉你我确切的演变过程,和你没什么不同。我是在50年代和60年代长大的。我曾相信法院总是会做出公正的判决。我曾相信美国国税局只会出于正当理由收钱和毁掉人们,而不会出于不正当理由。我曾相信所有的一切,而且其中很多都一直相信,直到,顺便说一句,直到看到大规模疫苗接种和通过恐惧进行大规模控制所发生的一切。我想告诉你我学到的是,这并不那么不寻常。我认为这很容易接受,那就是人类是否和一千年前一样?人类是否和凯撒时代一样?顺便说一句,凯撒做了什么?随便选一个罗马皇帝。无论他们想做什么,他们都和他们想和谁发生性关系就和谁发生性关系。8岁、10岁,男孩、女孩,无论是什么。即使在埃及法鲁克国王时代,埃及最后的国王之一,如果你是他的座上宾,他们会说:“你知道吗?我们六点吃晚饭。我们可以派人去你的房间。你想要一个年轻男孩还是一个年轻女孩?”毫不羞耻。没有任何问题。像你描述的在达沃斯遇到的那些富人和有权势的人,他们经常会从“我已经拥有了所有的钱。我已经拥有了所有的名声。我已经拥有了所有的影响力。我现在想做什么?”然后有时他们想做被禁止的事情。搞外遇。在公寓里养一个女孩。这些都很容易,对吧?呃,欺骗我的妻子。这些仍然很容易。14岁的女孩。哦哦。这就不那么容易了,但我已经做了所有其他的事情。这就是爱泼斯坦事件吸引人的地方,那就是被禁止的东西。我想非常简洁地回答这个问题,关于我的看法发生了什么变化,我如何从我开始的地方开始。首先,我曾在政府工作,在里根政府工作。我撒过谎。在我的职业生涯中,我曾多次做过欺骗性的谎言。呃,如果你愿意,我可以在一分钟内给你举例,但你知道,为了让起诉成功。我曾有点过分地让某个试图杀害客户的坏人被起诉或被拘留更长时间。嗯,我参加过很多会议,问题是发生了这件事,不是“我们该如何告诉公众”,而是“我们该告诉公众什么?”我们该如何扭曲这件事?这在美国的每个公司董事会都是常态。不是:“哦,婴儿爽身粉里有致癌的石棉。我想我们最好让所有人都知道。”会议不是这样的。会议是:“让我们通知FDA,说它正在研究中。”所以如果有人问起,我们就能应付过去。顺便说一句,在这些公司里,谁会因为他们所做的事情(阿片类药物等)而入狱?天哪,例如,一种止痛药导致十万人死于心脏病。呃,看在上帝的份上,Vioxx。呃,我的意思是,这简直令人难以置信,没有人会惹上麻烦,对吧?公司被罚款。你知道罚款对这些公司意味着什么吗?在我给你的那本新书**《禁忌事实》中,我列出了所有制药公司被刑事罚款的情况,它们付出了什么代价,以及它们仍然赚了多少钱,对吧?当然,他们做出了正确的决定,因为在财务上他们做得非常好。但我想讲到简洁的部分。把世界历史看作一个饼图,对吧?整个历史都是以暴政作为政府方法,作为控制方法。只有一小部分是代议制民主**。从希腊开始,西欧,美国,一小部分。所以我们的常态,史蒂芬,是暴政。这是人类的常态。而我所描述的那一小部分会发生什么?那一小部分总是走向极权主义。
Original English
Gavin: So I I can I can answer it easily because I was just like you. I would say I was naive. And in fact, by the way, I want to quickly acknowledge that I'm probably naive today, even with what you've heard, because there may be a level above the level above the level above that that I'm not seeing or I'm choosing not to see. I can tell you the exact evolution for me, not dissimilar to you. I grew up in the 50s and 60s. I believe the courts will always come up with a fair decision. I believe that the IRS will only collect uh money and destroy people with good reason, and they won't do it with bad reason. I believed everything and the a lot of it right up until co by the way right up until seeing what went on with both mass vaccination and the the mass control through fear here's what I want to tell you I've learned it's not that um unusual I think I think it's easy to to embrace which is that are human beings the same as they were a thousand years ago are human beings the same as they were in Caesar's time what did Caesar do by the way pick a a Roman emperor. Whatever the they wanted to do, they had sex with who and what they wanted. 8 years old, 10 years old, boy, girl, whatever it may be. Even in King Farooq's time in Egypt, one of the last kings of of Egypt, if you were a house guest, they'd say to you, you know what? We're going to have dinner at 6. We can send somebody to your room. Do you want a young boy or a young girl? No shame to it. No problem whatsoever. The rich and powerful people like the ones you were describing at Davos often go from, "I already have all the money. I've already had all the fame. I've already had all the influence. What do I want to do now?" And sometimes they want to do forbidden things. Have an affair. Keep a girl in an apartment. These are easy, right? Uh, cheat on my wife. These are easy still. 14-year-old girl. Uh-oh. Not getting so easy anymore, but I've done all the other stuff. And that's what the Epstein piece appeals to, which is the forbidden. I want to be very concise in in answering this question about what changed uh in terms of my view, how I've gotten, you know, started where I started. First of all, I worked in government, worked in the Reagan administration. I lied. I did things that were lies that were deceitful several times in my career. Uh I can give you examples in a minute if you want, but uh you know to to make a prosecution work. I I reached a bit uh to get somebody some bad guy who was trying to kill a client uh you know uh prosecuted or or in in custody for a longer period of time. Um I was in many meetings where the questions were this thing happened not how shall we tell the public but what shall we tell the public? How shall we spin this thing? This is the norm in every corporate uh boardroom in America. It's not, oh, there's there's a cancer causing asbestous in the baby powder. I guess we better let everybody know. That's not the meeting. The meeting is, let's notify the FDA and say it's under study. And so if we get asked, we'll get get through this thing. Who goes to jail, by the way, in these corporations for the they do, opioids, etc. My god, a 100,000 people dying from heart attacks from from a pain pill, for example. Uh Vio for God's sake. Uh the I mean it's it's unbelievable and nobody gets in trouble, right? Companies are fined. Do you know what the fines mean to these companies? In in that new book I gave you, Forbidden Facts, I I lay out what all the pharma companies have been fined criminally, what it cost them and what they made nonetheless, right? And of course they made the right decision because financially they they did very well. But I want to get to the concise part. Look at world history as a pie chart, right? The entire thing is tyranny as a government method, as a control method. Just a tiny sliver is uh representative democracy. A little bit starting in Greece, uh Western Europe, the United States, tiny sliver. So our norm, Stephen, is tyranny. That is the norm for human beings. And what happens to that tiny sliver that I'm describing? That tiny sliver always moves toward totalitarianism.
主持人: 那是什么意思?这意味着我们拥有的代议制民主,比如说在英国,现在在言论自由方面压力很大,或者在美国,它正在走向极权主义,因为它说它始于我们通过一项法律,如果你了解美国宪法,它说如果没有法律禁止,你就可以做,而对于政府来说,它说如果没有法律允许,你就不能做,这就是美国宪法。这就是美国的方法。嗯,看看它变成了什么。一项法律通过了,然后监管机构,那些未经选举的官员,就疯狂地按照他们想要的方式解释和应用这项法律。所以它正在走向极权主义。美国每年通过4万条新法律。有多少被废除了?几乎没有。
Original English
主持人: What does that mean? It means that the the representative democracy we have let's say in the UK which is pretty stressed right now in terms of of freedom of speech or in the United States moves toward totalitarianism in that it says it starts with we pass a law and if you know the the US constitution says if there isn't a law prohibiting it you can do it and for government it says if there isn't a law allowing it you cannot do it that's the US constitute itution. That's the US method. Well, look what it's become. A law gets passed and then regulators, unelected officials, go nuts on interpreting that law the way they want to and applying it the way they want to. And so the the it moves toward totalitarianism. 40,000 new laws passed in the United States every year. How many rescended? Almost none.
主持人: 那么我们现在在哪里?在美国,我们都问过这个问题,或者在英国,我们处于历史的哪个阶段?因为它似乎确实以某种周期循环。
Original English
主持人: So where are we now? here in the United States where we both asked that or in the UK where are we in the arc of history because it kind of does seem to move in sort of cycles
Gavin: 嗯,如果你问我们现在在哪里,比如西方社会或美国帝国正在衰落。首先,它是一个帝国吗?显然是,对吧?我们在海外有760个军事基地,760个。我们用于我们称之为国防的预算,现在特朗普已经更准确地改名为战争部,比世界上所有其他国家的军事开支总和还要多。中国有多少海外基地?我想是一个。现在,我不是说中国一切都很好。我只是说他们有不同的方法。他们的方法更接近我们60年代的方法,那就是提供有益的帮助。我们会重建你的道路等等。所以,我们是一个帝国,而且我们是一个正在衰落的帝国。我刚才说暴政是人类治理的常态。它是如何实施的?通过恐惧。总是通过恐惧。恐惧是导致分裂的方法。而分裂是权力的燃料。意思是,你希望人口分裂。你希望左派和右派。你希望特朗普的支持者和民主党人,以及永远的特朗普支持者和从不特朗普支持者。分裂是所有世界领导人都乐于看到的事情。我给你举一个最清楚的例子。国王和王后俯瞰城堡墙,当他们看到臣民打架时,他们会击掌相庆,因为如果他们在互相打架,他们就不会翻墙过来。而且总有一堵墙。但如果他们不互相打架,那将是一个大问题,因为那时他们就会翻墙过来,因为每个人心里都知道,等等,这些人生活在绝对的奢华中,而我却养不起我的孩子。他们的车队,今天和过去,都是华丽的马车,由一群马匹拉着,在街上溅我一身泥。这有什么区别呢?我的意思是,皇室制度简直就是一场骗局。
Original English
Gavin: now the we if you're talking about where are we now like western society or the US empire in decline and first of all is it an empire obviously right we have 760 military bases overseas 760 we have a larger budget for what we call defense now called war since Trump has changed the name to Department of War more accurately. Um, we have a larger budget than every other country in the world combined for military spending. How many overseas bases does China have? I think it's one. Now, I'm not saying China's all lovely. I'm just saying they have a different method. They have a method closer to what we had in the 60s, which was to come in with with beneficial help. We'll redo your roads, etc., etc. So, we're an empire and we're an empire in decline. And a moment ago when I said that that tyranny is the normal state of affairs for uh how people are governed. How is it exercised? Through fear. Always through fear. Fear is the method that causes division. And division is the fuel of power. Meaning you want the population to be divided. You want the left and the right. You want the the uh Trumpers and the and the and the Democrats and the forever Trumpers and the never Trumpers. Division is the fuel that all world leaders relish. I give you the example in the cleanest terms. The king and the queen look over the castle wall and when they see their subjects fighting, they high-five each other because if the if they're fighting with each other, they're not coming over the wall. And there's always a wall. And but if they're not fighting with each other, that's a big problem because then they're coming over the wall because everybody knows in their heart, wait a minute, these are living in absolute luxury while I don't I can't afford to feed my kids. They their their motorcades and today and in those days they're, you know, beautiful ornate uh wagons pulled by by a bunch of horses go by and splatter mud on me in the street. What really is the difference? I mean, royalty is such a scam.
主持人: 那么,如果西方世界处于衰落的帝国中,会发生什么?
Original English
主持人: So, what happens to the Western world if we're in a declining empire?
Gavin: 我给你一个乐观的版本,因为我有一个亲爱的朋友,他住在开普敦,有时会帮助我解决这个问题,因为像任何人一样,当我看到很多事情发生时,我可能会感到沮丧,可能会变得愤世嫉俗。这不是一个好地方。我想Tony,也许他甚至在你的节目中说过,Tony Robbins说过,你关注什么将决定你生活的质量。所以我可以关注制药公司和他们所做的一切,或者我可以关注大自然的美丽,花更多时间在大自然中,花更多时间陪伴我的孩子等等。所以我的乐观回答,来自我在开普敦的亲爱朋友尼克·哈德森,是即使帝国衰落,社会衰落也存在于这个工作室之外。它在伦敦。它在纽约。它在洛杉矶。它在西雅图。它在波特兰。这是不可避免的。在洛杉矶开车兜风,你知道的。每个高速公路入口,不是一些,是每一个入口下面都有帐篷,里面住着人。这不是好消息。但是,这里有好消息的部分。乐观的部分是,生存和繁荣总是会胜利,而且它不依赖于这些系统。意思是,你就是你,从精神意义上讲,或者从科学意义上讲,无论你如何看待自己,作为一个能量的集合,顺便说一句,它不需要那个身体,对吧?当那个身体消失时,能量不会去任何地方。意思是能量仍然在那里。它不会被摧毁。所以它是不可摧毁的。所以,你就是这个存在,这个意识,这个觉知。如果今天我们走出这里,周围的建筑物都消失了,社会衰落加速了,我们还会好吗?答案是肯定的。现在会发生什么?我们生活在森林里,现在我说史蒂芬,你很擅长木工,对吧?来加入我们。你说你擅长种植红薯。我们需要一些。让我们做吧。然后小群体的人们重新开始,即使在核战争之后,在各种事情之后。我知道这对于一些人来说很疯狂,但我从中获得了希望和乐观,那就是它不依赖于电力工作。它不依赖于管道工作和污水系统工作。最终,地球上会有足够的自然土地,让我们做以前发生过的事情,那就是重新开始。我给你一个非常快速的方面。一千年前,有一千个小政府。日本有幕府将军。有村庄。有一个人有300人,他是酋长。然后它变成了你我生活中所经历的,大约190个国家。但那190个国家实际上是大约五个权力中心,对吧?有北约,有英国脱欧,有产油国。最终,这五个权力中心将变成两个权力中心。我的预测是西方、美国和中国,但也会有其他人的预测。可以做得不同。然后那两个站在一个房间里。一个必须杀死另一个。这就是历史的进程。它就是这样发展的。历史上每个地理区域都是这样发展的,那就是我们有30个村庄,如果我能找到你的村庄,我们会带走女人,带走孩子,然后杀死男人。这只是一个数学问题。你们有多少人,我们有多少人?我认为这有点不可思议,特别是对于我这一代人来说,认为美国在某个时候会与中国开战,因为我们从未,你知道,我们从未经历过世界大战,但由于现在核武器的风险如此之高,一场战争理论上不会像以前的战争那样,它将是灾难性的。
Original English
Gavin: I give you the the optimistic version because I have a dear friend happens to live in Cape Town who helps me with this sometimes because like anybody when I look a lot at uh at at what happens, I can get discouraged. I can get cynical. It's not a good place to live. I think uh Tony maybe even he said it on your show Tony Robbins which is uh you know that what you focus on will determine uh the quality of your life. So I can focus on the pharma companies and all the they're doing or I can focus on on the beauty of of nature and spend more time in nature and spend more time with my kids etc. So my optimistic answer which comes from a dear friend Nick Hudson in in Cape Town is that even if empires decay and and social decay is is outside this studio. It's in London. It's in New York. It's in Los Angeles. It's in Seattle. It's in Portland. It's unavoidable. Take a drive in Los Angeles. You know it. Every freeway on-ramp, not some. Every single one of them has tents underneath it with people living there. That is not good news. And so, but here's the good news part of it. The optimistic part of it is that survival and thriving always prevails and it does not rely on these systems. Meaning, you are who you are as a in the spiritual sense or or in the scientific sense, whatever way you want to look at yourself as a as a collection of energy that doesn't need that body by the way, right? The energy doesn't go anywhere when that body is done. Uh meaning it's the energy is still there. It's not destructible. And uh so it's indestructible. So um you are this this being this awareness this consciousness. And if around us when we go outside here today all the buildings are gone and and social decay has accelerated are we going to be okay? And the answer is yes. What happens now? We're living in the forest and now I say Stephen you're pretty good at carpentry right? Come join us. And you say you're good at planting sweet potatoes. We need some of that. Let's do that. and small populations of people begin again, commence again, even after nuclear war, after a variety of things. And I know it's crazy to some people, but I take my my hope and my optimism from that fact, which is that it doesn't rely upon the electricity working. It doesn't rely upon the plumbing working and the sewage system working. And eventually there's enough of the earth, natural earth, for us to do what has happened before, which is start again. Give you a very fast aspect of this. Thousand years ago, there's a thousand little governments. There's shoguns in Japan. There's villages. There's a guy has 300 people and he's the chief. Then it becomes what it was in your life and my life, which is about 190 countries. But those 190 countries are really about five power centers, right? There's NATO, there's there's Brexit, there's the the oil producing countries. And eventually that five power centers will come to two power centers. The West, US, and China is my prediction, but it'll be somebody else's prediction. Can do it differently. And then those two are standing in a room together. And one has to kill the other. That's the course of history. That's how it goes. That's how it goes in every geographical area in history, which is we've got 30 villages and if I can find your village, we'll take the women, we'll take the children, and we'll kill the men. And it's just a matter of math. How many of there are of you and how many are there of of our group? It's I think it's somewhat inconceivable especially for people of my generation to think that the US is at all at some point going to be at war with China because we've never you know we never experienced a world war but because the stakes are now so high with nuclear weapons a war theoretically wouldn't be like previous wars it would be catastrophic.
主持人: 所以这是无法想象的。有些人现在说,核战争,抱歉,核武器现在阻止了我们轻易地卷入第二次世界大战,因此它不会发生。
Original English
主持人: So it's it's unimaginable. Some people say now nuclear wars have sorry nuclear weapons have now stopped us from getting into World War II as easily and therefore it won't happen.
Gavin: 是的。有些人相信“相互保证毁灭”的普遍概念,即双方都不会这样做。但你说你几乎无法想象,或者类似的话。嗯,我想帮助你进行这种想象,它是这样的。我们目前正在与俄罗斯交战。我们不仅仅是支持乌克兰的战争。我们正在与俄罗斯交战,因为我们提供卫星信息、电子战策略、无人机策略、提供目标信息,这就是今天的战争。这就是战争。战争不仅仅是战场上拿着步枪的人。那是低端元素。高端元素是俄罗斯拥有的超音速导弹,高端元素是情报和卫星技术。以及正在发生的各种各样的事情,其中一些甚至没有上新闻,顺便说一句,这些事情发生在俄罗斯,他们说:“哦,糟糕。”呃,或者发生在乌克兰,他们说:“哦,俄罗斯人已经搞清楚了那件事。”但美国在技术方面远远领先于世界上其他国家。所以,那就是与俄罗斯的战争。你也可以说我们与北越的战争就是与中国的战争。但现在已经毫无疑问了。所以,史蒂芬,这是一个漫长的回答,我想让你更接近你的想象。我们已经与俄罗斯开战了。
Original English
Gavin: Yes. Some people believe in that general concept of mutually assured destruction which is that neither side will will do it. But you said it's almost impossible for you to imagine or words to that effect. Um uh I want to help you uh with that imagining and it goes like this. We are currently at war with Russia. We are not supporting the the war in Ukraine only. We are at war with Russia because we are providing satellite information, electronic warfare strategies, drone strategies, providing targeting information, and that is war today. That is war. War is not just the guys on the battlefield with rifles. That's the low-end element. The high-end element is supersonic missiles, which Russia has, and the high-end element is intel and satellite technology. and the wide variety of things that are going on, some of which aren't even in the news, by the way, that go on in Russia and they say, "Oh shit." Uh, or that go on in Ukraine and they say, "Oh the Russians have figured out that thing." But the US is so far beyond other countries in the world in terms of technology. And so that is war with Russia. And you could say that our war with North Vietnam was war with China. But now there's just no question about it. So that was a long answer, Stephen, to say I want to get you your imagination closer. We're already at war with Russia.
主持人: 很多公司都会经历一个阶段,他们不再做最重要的事情——销售,而是被行政事务拖累,这通常是慢慢发生的,直到发生时你才真正注意到。慢慢地,动力开始流失。我们也遇到了这种情况,而我们的赞助商Pipe Drive是我10年前发现的一个解决方案,从那时起,我的不同公司的团队就一直在使用它。Pipe Drive是一个简单而强大的销售CRM,它可以让你清晰地看到你销售渠道中的任何交易。它还自动化了销售过程中许多繁琐、重复和耗时的部分,这反过来为你每月节省了大量时间,这意味着你可以重新专注于销售。早期决定改用Pipe Drive是一个真正的游戏规则改变者,它让正确的事情始终放在心上。我最喜欢的功能是Pipe Drive能够将你的CRM与多个电子邮件收件箱同步,这样你的整个团队就可以在一个平台上协同工作。我们不是唯一受益的。超过10万家公司使用Pipe Drive来发展他们的业务。所以,如果我说的这些引起了你的共鸣,请访问piperive.com/ceo,在那里你可以获得30天的免费试用。无需信用卡或付款。我刚刚投资的这家公司发展迅猛。我想成为告诉你这件事的人,因为我认为它将为你带来巨大的生产力优势。Whisper Flow是一款可以在你的电脑和手机上,在所有设备上使用的应用程序,它允许你与你的技术对话。所以,我不用写电子邮件,我只需点击手机上的一个按钮,就可以口述电子邮件,它使用AI来清理我说的话。然后当我完成时,我只需点击这里的一个按钮,整封电子邮件就为我写好了。它每天为我节省了大量时间,因为Whisper会学习我的写作方式。所以在WhatsApp上,它知道我更随意一些。在电子邮件中,它更专业一些。而且,他们刚刚做了一件非常有趣的事情。我可以创建一些小短语来自动为我完成工作。我只需说“Jack的LinkedIn”,它就会为我复制Jack的LinkedIn个人资料,因为它知道Jack在我的生活中是谁。这为我节省了大量时间。这家公司发展得非常疯狂。这就是为什么我投资了这家公司,以及为什么他们现在是这个节目的赞助商。坦率地说,Whisflow正在成为商业、生产力和创业领域最不为人知的秘密。现在就去whisperflow.ai/Steven看看吧。它将为你带来颠覆性的改变。
Original English
主持人: There's a phase a lot of companies hit where they're no longer doing the most important thing, which is selling, and they get really bogged down with admin and it's often something that creeps up slowly and you don't really notice until it's happened. Slowly, momentum starts to leak out. This happened to us, and our sponsor, Pipe Drive, was a fix I came across 10 years ago, and ever since my teams across my different companies have continued to use it. Pipe Drive is a simple but powerful sales CRM that gives you the visibility on any deals in your pipeline. It also automates a lot of the tedious, repetitive and timeconuming parts of the sales process which in turn saves you so many hours every single month which means you can get back to selling. Making that early decision to switch to Pipe Drive was a real gamecher and it's kept the right things front of mind. My favorite feature is Pipe Drive's ability to sync your CRM with multiple email inboxes so your entire team can work together from one platform. And we aren't the only ones benefiting. Over 100,000 companies use Piperive to grow their business. So, if something I've said resonates, head over to piperive.com/ceo where you can get a 30day free trial. No credit card or payment required. This company that I've just invested in is grown like crazy. I want to be the one to tell you about it because I think it's going to create such a huge productivity advantage for you. Whisper Flow is an app that you can get on your computer and on your phone on all your devices and it allows you to speak to your technology. So, instead of me writing out an email, I click one button on my phone and I can just speak the email into existence and it uses AI to clean up what I was saying. And then when I'm done, I just hit this one button here and the whole email is written for me. And it's saving me so much time in a day because Whisper learns how I write. So on WhatsApp, it knows how I am a little bit more casual. On email, a little bit more professional. And also, there's this really interesting thing they've just done. I can create little phrases to automatically do the work for me. I can just say Jack's LinkedIn and it copies Jack's LinkedIn profile for me because it knows who Jack is in my life. This is saving me a huge amount of time. This company is growing like absolute crazy. And this is why I invested in the business and why they're now a sponsor of this show. And Whisflow is frankly becoming the worstkept secret in business, productivity, and entrepreneurship. Check it out now at whisperflow spelled w i s p r f l o w.ai/Steven. It will be a game changer for you.
CIA的秘密技术与AI对现实的挑战
主持人: 说到疯狂的武器,我当时在读一个故事,你曾和CIA一起参观,他们给你看了一只机械蜻蜓。
Original English
主持人: Speaking of crazy weapons, I was um I was reading about a story where you did a a tour with the CIA and they showed you a mechanical dragonfly.
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah.
主持人: 带电池的。他们给你看了什么?
Original English
主持人: With a battery. What What did they show you?
Gavin: 嗯,我与这个机构有很多公开的合作。我当时在做一次演讲,之后他们带我去参观了CIA博物馆。他们给我看了很多东西。哦,这是那个在俄罗斯上空被击落的飞行员鲍尔斯戴的头盔。各种有趣的纪念品,其中之一是一只小蜻蜓,和真蜻蜓一样大小,它是机械的。我仔细看了看,觉得“哇,那真是太棒了,非常有趣”。他说:“你没有任何问题吗?”我说:“不,我的意思是,我明白了。”他说:“你为什么不问我它是什么时候造的?”我说:“好吧,它是什么时候造的?”“1967年。”在1967年,在我们还没有任何微型电子设备或微型马达之前,CIA就已经造出了那个小东西。它是一台小相机,可以像蜻蜓一样在空中飞来飞去,然后,你知道,飞回家。我不知道它能拍多少张照片,但这是一个关于AI的有趣故事,我想和你分享。人们会好奇,你知道,AI有多复杂,它现在在哪里?我的信念是,我们能接触到的所有AI,可能都是美国情报部门10年前就已经拥有的东西。我们可能已经在处理一些相当老旧的东西了。
Original English
Gavin: Well, I've given a I've had a lot to do with with the agency that's been that's been public over the years. And I was giving a talk and then afterwards they took me on a tour to a CIA museum. They showed me a lot of things. Oh, here's the helmet that was worn by that pilot who was shot down over Russia named Powers. all kinds of interesting memorabilia and one of them was a little dragonfly the size of a dragonfly and it was um mechanical and I looked at it real closely and thought wow that that's really fantastic it's very interesting and he said you don't have any questions at all I said no I mean I I get it and he said why don't you ask me when it was built U and I said okay when was it built 1967 in 1967 before we had any miniaturaturized electronics or motoriis ization. The CIA had built that little thing and uh and it was a a little camera that would fly around in here as a dragonfly and then uh and then you know fly home and I don't know how many pictures it held but it's an interesting piece I want to share with you about AI which is people wonder you know how sophisticated is AI and and where is it my belief is that everything we have access to like AI we probably have something that the US intelligence had 10 years ago. We're probably dealing with something quite old already.
主持人: 我正在看这只蜻蜓的图片。
Original English
主持人: I'm just looking at the a picture of this dragon.
Gavin: 哦,我甚至不知道它是公开的。
Original English
Gavin: Oh, I didn't even know it was public.
主持人: 嗯,这个。
Original English
主持人: Um, this
Gavin: 那就是。它在那里。
Original English
Gavin: that's the There he is.
主持人: 这个小东西。
Original English
主持人: This little thing here.
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah.
主持人: 你看,正如你所说,这是50年前制造的。所以,人们只能想象他们现在拥有的技术。
Original English
主持人: And you know, this was made, as you say, what 50 years ago. So, one can only imagine the type of technology they have now.
Gavin: 哦,当然。
Original English
Gavin: Oh, of course.
主持人: 我的意思是,他们可能甚至不需要放飞蜻蜓,因为我们有所有这些电子设备。
Original English
主持人: I mean, they pro they don't even need to fly a dragonfly in because we have all these electronic devices.
Gavin: 当然,他们可以打开我们的设备。可能你的手表,如果是Apple Watch的话,但肯定你的手机。是的,我们正在参与一个我甚至不会称之为实验的过程,但你肯定读过**《1984》,你的大部分听众也读过。在疫情初期,《1984》**成为世界第17畅销书,这让我非常振奋。
Original English
Gavin: Of course, they can they can turn on our devices. probably your watch if it's a an Apple watch but certainly your phone uh and u yeah uh the we are participating in I won't even call it an experiment but a process that you read 1984 I'm sure and most of your audience did I was very heartened during the beginning of co that 1984 became the 17th bestselling book in the world in the English language
主持人: 这告诉我,人们正在关注,他们看到他们在这里经历的事情有**《1984》**的影子。我认为所有科幻故事都会成真。我真的这么认为。我一次又一次地看到。你有什么建议可以给我的听众,关于如何应对我们今天生活的世界,你知道,如何避免风险、威胁,无论是你说的我们的软组织,还是我们的隐私或一般生活。建议从何开始?你说你养育了10个孩子。
Original English
主持人: telling me ah people are paying attention they see that what they're experiencing here has a degree of 1984 to it. I think all science fiction stories come true. I really do. I see it time after time. What advice would you give to my listeners about how to navigate in the world we're living in today, you know, to avoid risk, threat, you know, whether that's of our soft tissue as you said or just with our privacy or lives generally. Like where does the advice start? You said you raised 10 kids.
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah.
主持人: 你给你的10个孩子什么建议?
Original English
主持人: What advice are you giving to your 10 kids?
直觉与个人责任
Gavin: 嗯,他们都知道他们的父亲是一个重要的倡导者,我的第一本书,至今仍然是一本非常重要的书,《恐惧的礼物》,这本书在暴力主题上,我认为25年后仍然是世界上最畅销的书,这本书完全是关于直觉和个人责任的。所以我要对你的听众说的第一件事,也是对你说的,也是提醒我自己的,那就是人类没有最大的爪子,也没有最大的牙齿,也没有最大的肌肉。我们拥有相对于我们体型而言最大的大脑。而所有人类都拥有的核防御系统就是直觉。它与逻辑大相径庭。直觉的根源,顺便说一句,我在写那本书时学到的,是“in tear”,意思是守护和保护。所以当你思考直觉时,哦,我只是有一种感觉,我应该回到公寓再检查一下。我把火开着了吗?你回去打开门,你没有把火开着,但总会有其他事情发生,让你庆幸自己回来了。我相信直觉至少在两个方面总是正确的。第一,它总是以你的最大利益为出发点。它不是针对你的。它给你提供有价值的真实信息。第二,它总是基于某种东西。所以我们的旅程就是弄清楚,当我有一种直觉,比如和你一起做这个节目,谁知道为什么,但当我有那种直觉时,顺便说一句,我大部分节目都不做。我不知道原因是什么。我不知道会是什么。我的意思是,我可以用逻辑编造一个理由,对吧?我喜欢那个人。我从他的节目中学到了很多。我可以创造一个案例。我可以为任何事情创造一个案例。但如果它只是基于我的感受,而你所有成功的和完成的事情都是基于你的感受。它是基于直觉的。在美国,在西方,我们认为我们是用逻辑来做事的,对吧?我做一个大型PowerPoint演示文稿,然后我对董事会说:“这是原因。这是为什么,这是百分比。”他们说:“哦,好。”美国公司的董事会实际上宁愿我使用逻辑,即使我错了,也不愿我使用直觉,即使我是对的。所以当我告诉你,不,我只是认为这是正确的事情。我认为这会很聪明。我认为它会真正成功,就像亚马逊Prime一样,人们曾反对它,然后现在仅在美国就有1.75亿人使用它。巨大的成功。这是一个直觉过程,而不是一个逻辑过程。逻辑是薄弱和缓慢的。逻辑是A、B、C、D。直觉是瞬间从A到Z。而你不知道为什么。它是知道却不知道为什么。我对那个人感觉不好。我要退出。我说过我要做这笔生意。我退出了。我说过我要去参加那个活动。我打电话取消了。顺便说一句,取消是我最喜欢的事情之一。我向所有人推荐。我向我认识的所有人推荐取消和推迟。你没有义务遵守你的计划。你三个月前做了一个计划,你不知道三个月后你甚至会是谁,或者你、他们或任何人是否还活着。取消没有任何问题。现在我不会粗鲁地取消,顺便说一句,但只是为了总结,你知道,你的听众和观众可以做些什么,那就是真正爱上直觉,并学习你与自己沟通的方式。直觉会发出信号。好奇心,你只是想知道一些事情。怀疑、担忧甚至可以是直觉的信号。但最大的信号是真正的恐惧。当你感到真正的恐惧时,我不想做这个。我想问你一个问题。我见过马格努斯·卡尔森,他可以说是世界上最好的国际象棋选手。我在开普敦花了一些时间写关于直觉和本能的文章后见了他。我通过写作学到的一件事是,在很多情况下,当一个人拥有训练有素的直觉时,他们的第一个想法就是正确的想法。事实上,如果你给他们更多时间思考问题,他们会做出更糟糕的决定。所以当我作为世界排名第一的国际象棋选手在后台见到马格努斯·卡尔森时,我们都在台上。我问他:“听着,我有一个问题要问你。你现在基本上是凭直觉行事还是会思考?”他说:“我的第一个想法几乎总是正确的。”所以实际上,我把其他时间都花在确认我最初的直觉上。事实上,我当时正在给他讲一个躲避球比赛的故事,他们让躲避球职业选手看一张躲避球比赛的定格画面,然后问:“你会把球扔到哪里?”
Original English
Gavin: Uh well they they all know that their dad is a big proponent uh and and my first book which is still a a very uh big book the gift of fear that book is I think still the bestselling book in the world on violence after 25 years and um that book is all about intuition and personal responsibility. So the very first thing I would say to your listeners, to you to remind myself as well is that human beings did not get the biggest claws or the biggest teeth or the biggest muscles. We got the biggest brains relative to our size. And the nuclear defense system that all human beings have is intuition. Much different from logic. Intuition, the root of it, by the way, I learned when I was writing that book, is in tear, which means to guard and to protect. So intuition when you think about it, oh, I just have a feeling I should go back to the apartment and doublech checkck such and such. Did I leave the fire on on the pot? And you go back and you open the the door and you didn't leave the fire on the pot, but something else will always be going on that makes you glad you came back. I believe that intuition is always right in at least two ways. One, it always has your best interest at heart. It's not with you. It's giving you real information that's valuable. And and number two, uh it's always based on something. And so our journey is to figure out when I have an intuitive feeling like do this show with you, who knows why, but when I have that intuitive feeling, and by the way, I don't do most shows. I don't know what the reason is. I don't know what it'll be. I mean, I can make up one with logic, right? I like that guy. I learned a lot from his shows. I can create a case. I can make a case for anything. But if it's just based on what I feel and everything you've succeeded at and accomplished was based on what you felt. It was based on intuition. In America, in the West, we think we're doing it by logic, right? I do a big PowerPoint presentation and I say to the board, "Here's the reason. Here's why, and here's the percentages." And they say, "Oh, good." The board at corporations in America would actually prefer that I use logic even if I'm wrong instead of using intuition even if I'm right. So when I say to you, no, I just think it's the right thing to do. I I think it'd be smart. I think it'll be it'll really work out like something like Amazon Prime that people opposed and then it's like 175 million people just in America are using it. Big success. Intuitive process, not a not a logic process. Logic is weak and plotting. Logic does A B C D. Intuition does A to Z instantly. And you don't know why. It's knowing without knowing why. I don't feel good about that person. I'm I'm gonna back I I said I was going to make this business deal. I'm backing out of it. I said I was going to show up to that thing. I'm calling and cancelling. And by the way, cancelling one of my favorite things. I recommend it to everybody. I recommend cancelling and postponing to everybody I know. You are not obligated to keep your plans. You made a plan 3 months ago and you don't know who you'll even be or if you or them or anybody will even be alive 3 months from now. There's nothing wrong with cancelling. Now I don't do it rudely by the way but just to finish on you know sort of what your listen your your viewers uh and listeners can do is that is to really fall in love with intuition and to learn the way you communicate with yourself. The there's signals from intuition. Curiosity you just wonder something. Suspicion worry can even be a signal of intuition. Um but the biggest one is true fear. When you feel true fearh I don't want to do this. I wanted to ask you a question about this. I met with Magnus Carlson who is the arguably the best chess player in the world. And I met with him after spending some time in Cape Town writing about gut instinct and intuition, all these kinds of things. And one of the things that I learned through my writing was that in in many cases when someone has really well-trained intuition, their first thought is the right thought. And actually, if you give them longer to think about the problem, they make a worse decision. So when I met Magnus Carlson as a as the number one chess player in the world backstage, we were both on stage together. I said to him, I said, "Listen, I got a question to ask you. Do you basically now just run off intuition or do you think?" And he said, "My first thought is nearly always right." So actually, I spend the other time just confirming the first sort of intuition that I had. And actually, I was telling him about a dodgeball game where they got dodgeball players, professional dodgeball players, to look at a frozen image of a dodgeball game and said, "Where would you throw the ball?"
主持人: 当他们给他们很少时间做决定时,他们做出了更好的决定。当他们只是凭第一直觉时,他们做出了更好的决定。他们解冻了画面,那是正确的投掷。如果给他们更长时间,
Original English
主持人: And when they gave them little time to decide, they made a better decision. When they just went with their first gut instinct, they made a better decision. They unfroze it and it was the right throw. If they gave them longer,
Gavin: 他们做出了最糟糕的决定。而这种警告,我想也是我想问你的问题,就是在我看来,你几乎必须训练直觉。就像在我们生活中,我们有多次重复和模式识别的领域,我们的直觉是很有价值的。但在我们生活的其他领域,我们还没有训练这块“肌肉”,我们可能会做出错误的决定。一个这样的例子就是你第一次开始雇人。
Original English
Gavin: they made the worst decision. And the the sort of caveat and I guess the question for you is it appeared to me that you almost have to train the intuition. Like areas in our life where we've got multiple reps and pattern recognition, our intuition is valuable. But then in other areas of our life where we haven't trained the muscle yet, we can make bad decisions. One such example would just be like the first time you start hiring people.
主持人: 你还没有训练有素的直觉。所以你会说:“是的,她看起来不错。”但当你,我现在可能已经雇佣了数千人15年了,我有了直觉。那么你是否需要训练你的直觉?
Original English
主持人: You don't have a trained intuition yet. So you go, "Yeah, she seems nice." But then you get I'm probably been hiring thousands of people for 15 years now and I get you know I get an intuition. So do you have to train your intuition?
Gavin: 嗯,我认为它会随着你生活而自动发生,新的区分会增加。但我还相信,它是一种自然资源。我可以从精神层面来思考它。我们很难弄清楚为什么我们会以某种方式感受,我们做了马格努斯所说的,那就是我们得到了答案,然后我们回溯看它是否符合。对。我认为必要的训练,史蒂芬,不是为了提高你的直觉,而是为了倾听它,不审问它,不追究它。因为我给你举个例子。一个女人深夜在像这样的办公楼里工作。她在10楼。她要离开了。她按下电梯按钮。电梯门开了。电梯里有一个让她感到恐惧的男人。她出于某种原因不喜欢他。显然,她还没有机会评估所有问题。他穿什么衣服?他长什么样?我三周前听说了什么关于一个戴蓝色帽子和T恤的男人?她没有时间去思考,她的第一反应就是那样。她会怎么做?大多数女人会走进一个钢制隔音室,和她们害怕的人在一起。自然界中没有其他动物会这样做。那么,她为什么这样做呢?因为她会想:“哦,我不想让他觉得我是个种族主义者,因为他是西班牙裔,或者我不想成为那种人,或者我不想让这个现实成真,所以我要表现得好像它不是真的。”对吧?而我说的就是让门在他面前关上。没问题。如果你收到了信号,那是一个低成本的决定。等下一部电梯。对吧?这是一个非常低成本的问题。现在,在我的工作中有很多这样的例子,我采访了那些受害者。他们一次又一次地告诉我:“当我走进那个地下停车场时,我就知道那是之前看到的那辆车。”“当我遇到那个人时,我就知道。”事实上,有一位美丽的女士给我写了一封最美丽的信。我想它在**《恐惧的礼物》中,或者在随后的某本书中。她说她会看她一生的日记。她一直写日记,她回顾日记,上面会写着“遇到了这个人,嗯,对他有点恶心,不太确定,和他约会了,然后嫁给了他。”然后她写给我的是,她说她一次又一次地看到,日记里写着:“结局蕴含在开始之中。”所以,我鼓励人们做的,回到你最初的问题,就是人们如何才能更安全,那就是倾听他们的直觉**,知道它的功能是保护你,它正在做这件事。当我读到你关于直觉的工作和你的看法时,我开始思考我生命中那些我。
Original English
Gavin: Well I think it happens automatically as you as you live life that new distinctions are added. Um but I also believe that uh it is a natural resource. I could think of it in a spiritual sense. It's very hard to figure out why we feel a certain way and we do what what Magnus said which is we get our answer and then we backtrack and see if it fits. Right. I think the training that's necessary, Stephen, is not the training to uh improve your intuition. Uh but rather the training to listen to it and to not interrogate it and to not prosecute it. Because I'll give you an example. A woman is working late at night in a in an office building like this. She's on the 10th floor. She's leaving. She pushes the button for the elevator. The elevator door opens up. Inside the elevator is a man who causes her fear. She doesn't like it for whatever reason. Obviously, she has no opportunity yet to assess all the issues. What's he dressed like? What's he look like? What did I hear 3 weeks ago about a guy who wore a blue cap and t-shirt and she doesn't have any time for her first reaction was like that. What does she do? Most women, they get into a steel soundproof chamber with someone they're afraid of. And there's not another animal in nature that will do it. Now, why does she do it? Because the thought comes, oh, I don't want him to think I'm a racist because he's Hispanic or I don't want to be that kind of person or I don't want this reality to be true, so I'm going to act like it's not true. Right? And what I say is let the door close in his face. No problem. If you've got the signal, uh that's a lowcost decision. Wait for the next elevator. Right? That's a very lowcost issue. Now, there are so many examples of this in my work where I interviewed people who had been victimized. And time after time, they would tell me, I knew when I walked into that underground parking lot that that was the same car that I'd seen earlier. I knew when I met that guy such and such. In fact, there's a beautiful a woman who wrote me the most beautiful thing. I I think it's in in Gift of Fear or or it's in one of the subsequent books. And she said that she would look at her lifelong diary. She'd kept a lifelong diary and she looked back at it and it would say met this guy um feel a little queasy about him, not so sure, dated him, married him. And then she what she wrote to me was she said again and again I could see there it was in my diary listen to this the ending embedded in the beginning and so what I encourage people to do going to your original answer is how people can be safer is listen to their intuition know that its function is to protect you that's what it's doing when I was reading about your work on intuition and your perspective on it I it got me thinking about people in my life that I
主持人: 明天必须摆脱的人。
Original English
主持人: have to get rid of tomorrow
Gavin: 嗯,实际上,我头脑里有那个小小的警钟,当你有那个小小的警钟直觉时,就像我不知道答案是什么,但我感觉有些不对劲。
Original English
Gavin: Well, actually that I have you know that little alarm bell in your head when you have you have a little alarm bell intuition like I don't know what the answer is but I feel like something isn't right
主持人: 我头脑里那个小小的警钟,我当时想,那我该怎么办?我想有一个特别的例子,我当时感觉到某个人有点不对劲。然后三个月后,我们参加了一个活动,他们开始谈论他们的童年。
Original English
主持人: and that little alarm bell in my head I'm like so what do I do about that? And I think there was one particular example I was thinking of where I was getting this little vibe from someone that something was just off. And then 3 months later, we were at this event and they started opening up about their childhood.
Gavin: 在谈论他们童年的过程中,我了解到了他们母亲的一些事情,以及他们母亲曾经对他们做过的一些事情。
Original English
Gavin: And in the course of opening up about their childhood, I learned something about their mother and something their mother used to do to them.
主持人: 他们正在和别人谈论这种行为在他们身上造成的影响。
Original English
主持人: And they were talking to someone else about this behavior that it's created in them. M
Gavin: 突然间一切都明白了。那个让我感觉不对劲的东西。我想现在是因为他们童年的一些我不知道的事情,这意味着他们有这种行为,这会让你感到有点不舒服。
Original English
Gavin: it suddenly all made sense. That thing that was giving me was making me feel like the vibe was off. I think now is because of something from their childhood that I didn't actually know which meant they have this behavior which will make you feel a little bit uncomfortable.
主持人: 在那一刻,我当时在想这个例子,在你来之前,因为我想,在这种情况下,我的直觉告诉我一些事情,但我不知道它告诉我什么。我想很多人都有这种感觉。他们对某人有一种感觉,觉得有些不对劲,他们把它解释为X,而它可能是Y。
Original English
主持人: And in that moment and with I was thinking about this example before you arrived cuz I was like in that case my my intuition told me something but I didn't know what it was telling me. I imagine a lot of people have that. They have a vibe of someone something's not quite right and they're interpreting it to mean X when it could be Y.
Gavin: 是的。有时会有一条非常清晰的线索,就像在我的生活中,我怀疑在你的生活中也是如此,某些童年经历和我们最终所做的事情之间,通常有一条非常直接的线索。在我的案例中,一个非常简单的例子就是恐惧。然后我开始对恐惧有了深刻的理解,它的两面。而且,对它有一些同情,有一些洞察力,然后我去研究它。我的童年有暴力。所以现在我,现在已经很久了,我已经71岁了。所以我的童年已经很久了,它不再像我生命中的大部分时间那样扼住我的喉咙,那时叙事对我来说非常非常重要,我童年的叙事很重要。请继续。你可以提问。我本来想给大家介绍一下你童年的背景。
Original English
Gavin: Yes. Sometimes there's a very nice like in my life and I suspect in yours too, there's often a very straight line between certain childhood experiences and what we ultimately do. In my case, a very easy one is there was fear. I then come to have a deep understanding of fear, both sides of it. uh and and and some compassion for it and some uh uh insight and I I then study it. There was violence uh in my childhood. And so I now come now it's so long ago that I'm 71. So my childhood is so long ago now that it doesn't have a a grip on my throat like it did for a lot of my life where the narrative was very very important to me and the narrative of my childhood was important. Go ahead. You can ask question. I was going to probably give people the context on your childhood.
Gavin: 哦,呃,你还是我?我来说吧。好的,很好。是的,我的童年。该死的。我来告诉他们。呃,所以是的,那是一段非常非常艰难的时光。我母亲是个海洛因成瘾者。呃,她相当暴力。她非常困扰。她在39岁时自杀了,我当时16岁。那对我来说是一种失败,因为我认为我的工作是让我们所有人都活着度过这场戏剧。嗯,她在我面前射杀了我的继父。呃,我们住的那栋房子里有很多子弹,顺便说一句,我几个月前看到了那栋房子。我想那栋房子的墙壁和地板上还有九颗子弹,我可以确定,可能还在那里。所以,虽然我平静地向你描述这一切,呃,这是因为两件事。时间上的距离,但最重要的是因为疗愈。我想给你我在这里对疗愈的定义。我们所有人的疗愈定义是,当我们停止使用任何能量来管理过去时。这让我们在当下拥有所有的能量。那么我所说的使用能量来管理过去是什么意思呢?嗯,如果我一直在讲述那个故事,然后我对我的妻子说:“嗯,因为我妈妈做了这个,所以我觉得这样那样。”我生命中曾经历过那些事情离我很近的时期。今天,我觉得我没有使用任何能量来管理过去。我告诉你的那个故事,这一系列戏剧都发生了。每当你听到有人,无论是父母还是生活中的任何人,自杀时,我们通常会想:“哦,那一定是一段多么可怕的经历。”当你听到有人自杀时,你真正应该想的是:“哦,那一定是一系列多么可怕的经历导致了这一切。”我想很快告诉你,我做了几个关于我母亲的梦,它们特别有力量。我向听众提供这个,让他们知道梦境体验有时是你唯一能得到的。对吧?因为我母亲在我16岁时去世了。所以我没有机会和她面对面坐下来,问她:“你当时在想什么?你当时的生活发生了什么?”但是在一个梦里,她有一次来找我,我问她:“你为什么对我那么残忍?”她完全困惑了,她对我说:“对你残忍?我是在为你非凡的人生做准备。”我认为这是真的。我认为这就是发生的事情,对你来说,无论你的经历是什么,对我们之前谈到的Tony Robbins来说,无论他的经历是什么,都需要那些经历。如果你没有那些经历,你就不会有一个长大后只想免费写这些书,免费出售它们,免费出版它们的人,比如现在的**《禁忌事实》,为了帮助人们处理怀疑、恐惧等问题。你就不会有一个像我这样的人,我的野心早已消失。我对更多金钱、更多房子的野心。嗯,房子我可能还会有点动摇,但现在是为了服务他人。以前不总是这样,但现在是为了服务他人,因为我相信公共生活,它包括你。如果你只给我一个坏榜样,那就是服务。如果你给我一个好榜样,那是一种更美好的服务形式。这可能是一份更好的工作,但最终所有这些都是服务。我们能观察到的所有公共生活中的人,以及我们私人生活中的人。都是服务。你知道,我记得我的一个朋友告诉我,他回家过感恩节,他看到了他的全家人,他说他学会了只待一天。他说因为如果他待两天,所有的事情都会在第二天发生。他还学会了住在酒店。我问:“你住在家里吗?”他说:“哦,不,绝不,绝不住在家里。”因为这里有一群人。但他告诉我的有趣之处是,他说:“啊,查琳阿姨,你教会我说话更轻声,因为你说话太大声了。”他说:“卡洛叔叔,你教会我更温柔,因为,天哪,你做任何事情都很粗鲁。摔杯子,你参与的方式。爸爸,你教会我倾听别人,因为你从来不听我说过任何话,即使是今天。”这不是一个看待问题的美丽方式吗?基本上,这些人都是我们生活中的老师。对于我的母亲,百分之百,呃,我早已超越了宽恕,进入了对那些美好部分的感激。顺便说一句,这是一个受苦的人,对吧?这是一个,你知道,慈善机构和社会福利所关注的人。呃,你知道,一个有三个孩子,没有工作,而且是个海洛因成瘾者的女人,看在上帝的份上。那不是一份轻松的工作。呃,还有其他毒品,顺便说一句,这帮助我在成长过程中对制药公司保持怀疑,因为她服用的一些药片,其中一种叫做多拉定**,现在已经因为导致什么而被下架了?精神病,这解释了她很多疯狂的行为。所以所有这些,你知道,教学,取决于你如何处理它。意思是,我们所有人,没有人能活着离开这里,对吧?每个人都有一个故事要讲。我记得有一个案例,我高估了自己预测人类行为的能力,我说,你知道,我在这些书中说,你可以预测人类行为,对吧?今天开车来这里,我必须预测数千人的行为,仅仅基于他们周围大型金属物体的微小移动。你知道那个开始变道进入你的车道,然后又及时纠正的人。你永远不要相信那个人。你总是想远远地跟在他后面,或者远远地在他前面。所以,我们一直在预测人类行为。但我高估了我的能力。我当时想:“哦,我是预测人类行为的天才先生,因为我开发了这些人工直觉系统来预测人类行为。”我当时在一个会议上,会议上有一群人,大约5分钟后就要开始了。有几个人正在安慰一个在桌子尽头哭泣的女人。我带着评判性地想:“嗯,她为什么要来开会?我的意思是,如果她不能开会,她在这里做什么?”我知道那是一个男朋友问题,对吧?她正在为此哭泣,他们正在安慰她。会议开始了,那个女人第一个发言,她含着泪水说:“对不起,各位。呃,我会尽力开好会,但正如你们很多人所知,我丈夫四天前杀害了我12岁的儿子。”所以,我那次带有评判性的预测之旅,错得离谱,那对我来说是一次令人谦卑的经历,因为我会在一瞬间就否定那个人。那是预测和直觉的另一面,对吧?你可以否定别人,然后迅速抛弃他们。所以,你知道,当你收到这种直觉信号时,我们是否有责任去理解它?是的,我们有责任去理解它。我遇到过多少人,我曾认为那个人多么,我再也不想和那个人说话了。我也没有。那是我的损失。有时那会是世界上最伟大的人。有时那会是一段很棒的关系。现在我应用乔治·哈里森的规则。披头士乐队的乔治·哈里森写下了这首令人难以置信的歌词,收录在**《当我的吉他轻轻哭泣时》中,那就是“我看着你们所有人,看到那里沉睡的爱。”我们有一个大脑预算。可以这样想,我们每天可以花费的能量是有限的。我说的是寻找简化生活的方法。我节省身体预算的一种方式是通过我们的赞助商Factor**,他们是一家送餐服务公司。他们特别棒,因为他们制作新鲜餐点,并迎合多种不同的饮食需求。高蛋白、生酮、纯素、素食、低碳水、无麸质、原始饮食,应有尽有。每餐都由营养师设计,由厨师制作,并直接送到我这里。新鲜,从不冷冻。所以,如果你准备好简化你的饮食摄入,请访问factormeals.com/diary50off。并使用我的代码diary50off,即可获得你的第一个Factor盒子50%的折扣,外加一年的免费早餐。此优惠仅适用于使用代码和符合条件的自动续订订阅购买的Factor新客户。如果我们需要什么,那就是联系。尤其是在我们今天生活的世界里。这正是我们创建这些对话卡片的原因。因为在这个节目中,当我与我的嘉宾坐在一起进行那些深入、亲密的对话时,这种非凡的事情一次又一次地发生。我们感到彼此深深相连。在每集节目的最后,我采访的嘉宾都会为下一位嘉宾留下一个问题,我们把它们变成了这些对话卡片。我们还添加了这些转折卡片,让你的对话更加有趣。对话卡片还有更多转折。这是全新的版本。有史以来第一次,我在卡包中添加了这张金卡,这是我提出的一个独家问题。但我只在第一批对话卡片中放入金卡。所以现在就去购买吧,以免限量版金卡售罄。请点击下方描述中的链接。通过你的工作,你曾与地球上一些最有趣、最成功、最富有、最有权势的人在幕后共事。因此,你能够以大多数人永远无法看到的方式,看到事物的两面。你能够看到他们在公共生活中的样子,然后你能够看到他们在私人生活中的样子,而且通常情况下,你会在他们生命中最艰难的时刻看到他们。
Original English
Gavin: And in that moment and with I was thinking about this example before you arrived cuz I was like in that case my my intuition told me something but I didn't know what it was telling me. I imagine a lot of people have that. They have a vibe of someone something's not quite right and they're interpreting it to mean X when it could be Y. Yes. Sometimes there's a very nice like in my life and I suspect in yours too, there's often a very straight line between certain childhood experiences and what we ultimately do. In my case, a very easy one is there was fear. I then come to have a deep understanding of fear, both sides of it. uh and and and some compassion for it and some uh uh insight and I I then study it. There was violence uh in my childhood. And so I now come now it's so long ago that I'm 71. So my childhood is so long ago now that it doesn't have a a grip on my throat like it did for a lot of my life where the narrative was very very important to me and the narrative of my childhood was important. Go ahead. You can ask question. I was going to probably give people the context on your childhood. Oh, uh, you or me. I'll do it. Okay, good. Yeah, my childhood. Damn it. I'll I'll tell them. Uh, so yeah, a very, you know, very difficult time. My mother was a heroin addict. Uh, she was, uh, quite violent. She was very troubled. She committed suicide when she was, uh, 39 years old and I was 16. And that was a a kind of failure for me because I considered it my job to to get us all through this drama alive. Um, she shot my stepfather in front of me. Uh, a lot of in that house that we lived in, I think there I I saw the house a few months ago, by the way. I think there are nine bullets in the walls and floor of that house uh that I can account for, probably still there. And so, while I'm describing this to you dispassionately, uh, it's because of two things. The distance in terms of time, but most of all because of healing. And the the I want to give you my definition of healing in this context. My definition of healing for all of us is when we stop using any of our energy to manage the past. And this gives us all of our energy in the present moment. And so what do I mean using energy to manage the past? Well, if I'm keeping that story going and I'm saying to my wife, well, because my mama did this, this is why I feel such and such. which I went through times in my life when when those things were much closer to me. Today, I feel like I'm not using any of my energy to manage the past. The the narrative I told you this whole series of of dramas happened. And anytime you hear about a parent or or anybody in somebody's life committing suicide, we often think, "Oh, what a terrible experience that must have been." What you really ought to think when you hear about somebody committing suicide is, "Oh, what a series of terrible experiences there must have been leading up to that." And I want to tell you real quickly that I had a a couple of dreams that my mother was in that were particularly powerful. And I offered this to the audience to know that dream experiences are sometimes all you're going to get. Right? Because my mother died when I was 16. So I don't have an opportunity to sit across the table with her and say, "What were you thinking when you such and such and what was going on in your life when such and such?" And and but in a dream, she came to me once and I asked her, "Why were you so cruel to me?" And she was totally perplexed and she said to me, "Cruel to you, I was preparing you for this extraordinary life." And I think that's true. I think that's what happened is that for you, whatever your experience was, for Tony Robbins, who we talked about earlier, what his experience was, it took those experiences. You take away those experiences and you don't have someone who grows up wanting nothing more than to write these books for free and sell them for free and get them published for free like Forbidden Facts, the current book, in order to help people deal with these issues of skepticism, of fear, etc. You don't get somebody doing what I do. Uh where my ambition is long gone. My ambition for more more anything, more money, more houses. Well, houses I might still slip on, but now it's about service to other people. Wasn't always, but it was service to other people because I believe that public life, it includes you. If all you do is give me a bad example, that's service. If you give me a good example, that's a prettier form of service. It's a maybe it's a nicer job you got, but ultimately all of it is service. Everything that we can observe in of people in public life and people in our private lives. It's all service. You know, I remember a friend of mine telling me he went back home for Thanksgiving and he saw his whole family and he said he learned to only stay for one day. He said because all the happened on the second day with his family if he stayed for two days. And he also learned to stay in a hotel. I said, "Are you staying at home?" He said, "Oh, No, never never stay at home. Because here was this group of people. But what he told me that was interesting is he said, "Ah, Aunt Charlene, you taught me to speak more quietly because you talk so loud." And he says, "Uncle Carlo, you you taught me to be more gentle because, man, you're rough in everything you do. Throw the glasses around and the way you engage. Dad, you taught me to listen to people because you never listen to a thing I said even today. Isn't it a beautiful way of looking at it? Basically, these were the teachers in in our lives. For my mother, 100% uh the I'm I'm so far past forgiveness and so far into gratitude for the pieces that were wonderful. And by the way, this is a suffering person, right? This is a person that, you know, that charities are for and and social welfare is for. Uh, you know, a woman with three kids and no job and a heroin addict for God's sake. That's not an easy job. Uh, and and other drugs too, by the way, which helped me as I grew up to be skeptical of pharma because some of the pills she took, one of them called Doradin, has now been taken off the market for causing what? Psychosis, which explains a lot of her craziness. And so all of this this, you know, teaching that it depends what you do with it. Meaning you we all we all nobody gets out of here alive, right? Everybody's got a story to tell. And I remember a case where I overvalued my own ability to predict human behavior, which I say, you know, I say in these books, you can predict human behavior, right? To to drive here today in traffic, I had to predict the behavior of thousands of people based on just the little movements of the big metal objects around them. You know that guy who starts to move over into your lane and then he catches himself and goes. You never trust that guy. You always want to get way behind him or way in front of him. So, we're predicting human behavior all the time. But I overvalued mine. I thought, "Oh, I'm Mr. Genius predicting human behavior because I developed these systems of artificial intuition that predict human behavior." And I was at a meeting and there were a group of people at the meeting and it was going to start in about 5 minutes. And a few people were comforting one woman who was really sobbing at the end of the table. And I thought to myself judgmentally, um, why'd she even come to the meeting? I mean, if she can't do the meeting, like, what's she doing here? And I knew it was a boyfriend issue, right? That's what she's crying about and they're comforting her. The meeting begins and that woman speaks first and she says through her tears, "I'm sorry you guys. Uh, I'll do my best at the meeting, but as many of you know, my husband killed my 12-year-old son 4 days ago." So my little journey into judgmental prediction was about as wrong as you could be and it was a uh a humbling experience for me because I would have discounted that person in a moment. That's the other side of of prediction and intuition, right? You can discount people uh and quickly toss them away. And so you know when you get this intuitive signal, do we have a responsibility to understand it? Yeah, we have a responsibility to understand it. How many people have I met who I thought what an that guy is. I don't ever want to talk to that guy again. And I didn't. My loss. Sometimes it was would have been the greatest person in the world. Uh sometimes it would have been a great relationship. And now I apply the the George Harrison rule. George Harrison the Beatles which writes this who writes this unbelievable lyric that's in While My Guitar Gently Weeps, which is I look at you all and see the love there that's sleeping. We have a brain budget. The way to think about it is we have a limited amount of energy that we can spend every single day. I'm saying find ways to simplify your life. And one way I've conserved my body budget is via our sponsor Factor who are a meal delivery service. They are especially great because they make fresh meals and they cater to so many different diets. High protein, keto, vegan, vegetarian, low carb, gluten-free, paleo diets, you name it. Every meal is designed by a dietitian, made by chefs, and delivered right to me. Fresh and never frozen. So, if you're ready to streamline your food intake, visit factormeals.com/diary50off. And use my code diary50off to get 50% off your first Factor box plus free breakfast for 1 year. And this offer is only valid for new Factor customers with code and qualifying auto review subscription purchase. If there's anything we need, it is connection. Especially in the world we're living in today. And that is exactly why we created these conversation cards. Because on this show, when I sit here with my guest and have those deep, intimate conversations, this remarkable thing happens time and time again. We feel deeply connected to each other. At the end of every episode, the guest I'm interviewing leaves a question for the next guest, and we've turned them into these conversation cards. And we've added these twist cards to make your conversations even more interesting. And there are so many more twists along the way with the conversation cards. This is the brand new edition. And for the first time ever, I've added to the pack this gold card, which is an exclusive question from me. But I'm only putting the gold cards in the first run of conversation cards. So get yours now before the limited edition gold cards are all gone. Head to the link in the description below. Through your work, you've um been behind the scenes with some of the most interesting people on planet Earth, most successful, richest, most powerful people on planet Earth. And you get to see therefore both sides of the fence in a way that most people would never see. You get to see how they are in the public life and then you get to see them in their private life and often times you'll get to see them
主持人: 在他们生命中最艰难的时刻。
Original English
主持人: during some of the hardest moments of their life.
Gavin: 大部分时间都是。是的。
Original English
Gavin: Most of the time. Yeah.
主持人: 你从这种接触中学到了什么?
Original English
主持人: What have you learned from that exposure?
重新定义现实与人生真理
Gavin: 嗯,可能学到了很多。所以,我会给出我直觉上想到的答案。当我还是个孩子的时候,我曾经看电视,我相信电视比我们的生活更真实,而我通过经验显然学到,事实恰恰相反,对吧?媒体世界是不真实的,而我们的生活是真实的。史蒂芬,这在今天非常重要,因为有了AI和社交媒体以及其他事物,我们实际上被挑战去辨别什么是真实的,什么是不真实的。特朗普真的发表了那次演讲吗?还是AI制作的影片?那真的发生了吗?我看到的是真实的吗?那只猫真的那样做了吗?还是AI制作的影片?我们现在被挑战去理解并选择,我会说,什么是真实的,什么是不真实的。这个挑战有其美丽之处,因为它正在让我,对我来说,它正在让我质疑现实本身。换句话说,我正在质疑什么对我来说真正重要,我将称什么为真实?我给你举一些例子。我将称触觉为真实。拥抱你。握你的手。我将称之为真实。大自然。在公园里度过的时间。与动物在一起的时间。我与猫狗在一起的时间。对我来说极其重要,因为我信任它们,对吧?我相信那只猫是认真的。它正在做它正在做的事情。如果它想在我胸前咕噜,它就是想在我胸前咕噜。如果不想,它就会离开,对吧?
Original English
Gavin: Well, probably a lot. So the I I'll but I'll give a a uh what what answer comes to me intuitively. When I was a kid and I used to watch television, I believed when I was a kid that the television was more real than our lives and I learned obviously through my experience that the exact opposite was true, right? The media world was unreal and our lives were real. And this Stephen is incredibly important today because with AI and social media and other things, we actually are challenged to know what is real and what is not real. Did Trump really make that speech or is it an AI film? Did did that really happen or is is that real what I'm looking at? The cat really did that or is that an AI film? And we are challenged now to understand and choose I would say what's real and what's not real. That challenge has beauty in it because it's making for me it's making me question reality itself. In other words, um I'm questioning what really matters to me and what will I call real? And I'll give you some examples. I'll call touch real. Hug you. Shake your hand. I'll call that real. Nature. Time in a park. Time with animals. my time with cats and dogs. Unbelievably important to me because I trust those right? I believe that cat means business. This is what it's doing. If it wants to be on my chest purring, it wants to be on my chest purring. And if it doesn't, she's out of there, right?
主持人: CIA猫。
Original English
主持人: CIA cat.
Gavin: 所以,孩子也是一样。我记得我儿子见到我的一个著名客户,他当时可以说是世界上最富有的人等等。我儿子三岁时问:“你有多少钱?”但这并没有冒犯,因为他只是个小孩子。他只能是真实的。一个小孩子除了真实别无他物。所以,我对AI持乐观态度,尽管它肯定会给人类带来一些问题。但我对它持乐观态度,是因为我认为人们质疑现实是件好事,因为它最终是什么?它是什么?如果这是一个模拟,就像埃隆提出了一个很好的论点,顺便说一句,我认为他倾向于那个方向,有时我也和他一样。如果这是一个模拟,那么我们想让它变得有趣,我们想稍微超脱一点。在模拟中,我们是不会受到伤害的,对吧?我们的精神、灵魂、赋予我们生命的能量会继续存在。它不会去任何地方。它让我们见证这种体验,而不是感觉自己是受害者,对吧?我们去看一部好电影,如果我们知道结局,我们就不会去看,对吧?但我们,但这部电影真的很好。所以当我看到AI的东西时,相信我,我不知道你,你更年轻,所以你可能有更好的本能或直觉,但我有时真的无法分辨。我的意思是,我把一些东西发给我一个朋友,说:“我认为那不是,我不认为那只狗真的跳到架子上做了那样的事情。我不相信。”然后你再看几遍。但这对我们来说是件好事,因为它把我们带到了我们认为真实的一切。触觉、味觉、感觉、眼泪、大自然,无论我们认为它是什么,我相信那就是我想去的地方。那就是我想花时间的地方。
Original English
Gavin: And so, and and children are the same thing. I remember my son's meeting a famous client of mine who, let's say, is was the richest man in the world, etc. at that moment. and uh and my son at 3 years old, how much money do you have? Um but it held no offense because it's this little kid. All it can be is real. There's nothing but real in in a little kid. And so where I think optimistically about AI, which definitely has some problems for for for the human race for sure. But where I think optimistically about it is I think it's good for people to question reality because what ultimately is it? What is it? If this is a simulation, like Elon makes a good argument for, and I think he leans in that direction, by the way, and sometimes I I do too with him. If it's a simulation, uh, then we want to make it interesting and and we want to be a bit outside. In in a simulation, we're not vulnerable, right? The the the spirit, the soul, the energy that animates us um will continue. It's not going anywhere. And it lets us witness this experience rather than feel victim to it, right? we get to this is a good movie and we wouldn't go see a movie if we knew the outcome, right? But we but this movie is really good. And so when I look at AI things and trust me, I don't know about you, you're younger, so you're you may have better instincts or intuitions for it, but I genuinely can't tell sometimes. I mean, I send something back to a friend of mine and say, I think that's I don't think the dog actually jumped up on the top shelf and did that such and such. I I don't buy it. And then you look at it a few more times. But this is good for us because what it brings us to is whatever we think is real. Touch, taste, uh uh the feelings, tears, nature, whatever we think it is, I believe that's where I want to be. That's where I want to spend my time.
主持人: 所以有一种理论叫做**“死互联网理论”,他们认为因为AI和我们能够制作,我实际上早些时候给我的一些团队成员发了一个视频。这是一个两分半的视频,它是用这些AI工具制作的,它是一个非常著名的电影的结局,有人只是改变了它,他们,一个孩子在他的卧室里为电影制作了一个新的结局。几个提示,他们就得到了电影的新结局。我一直在向前推演,向前推演,再向前推演。最终你会达到一个点,机器人会不断地向互联网喷洒内容。在这样的世界里,除非我们有这些视网膜扫描仪来确认我正在实时发布帖子,否则你就会陷入这种“死互联网理论”,即你看到的一切都是由AI**编写或制作的。因此,等等。我们的怀疑程度只会提高到我们不相信我们所看到的一切。你正在说这实际上对我们是件好事,因为它让我们再次质疑我们所看到的一切,并回归到不可替代的人类真实事物。
Original English
主持人: So there's this theory called the dead internet theory where they think that because of AI and us being able to make I sent actually sent a video to some of my team members earlier. It's a two and a half minute video and it's made with one of these AI tools and it it's the ending of a very famous movie and someone's just changed it and they it's a kid in their bedroom has made a new ending to the movie. couple of prompts, they've got a new ending to the movie. And I I was playing this forward, playing this forward and forward and forward. And eventually you get to a point where bots will be just spraying content at the internet. And in such a world, unless we have these sort of um retina scanners to confirm that I'm doing the post live, you get to this dead internet theory where like everything you see is either written by produced by AI. Therefore, wait. Our level of skepticism just raises to the point that we don't trust anything we're seeing. You're saying that that's actually a good thing for us because it makes us question what we're seeing again and revert to real things that are irreplaceably human.
Gavin: 是的。我认为这很好,我认为这在精神上对我们有益,可以重新定义现实,而不是回到我生命中20年前,可能也是你生命中20年前。我当时相信什么?政府说的一切,每一个官方叙事。我为什么不相信呢?
Original English
Gavin: Yes. I think it's good to I think it's it's spiritually good for us to redefine reality as opposed to take me back 20 years in my life and possibly yours. What did I believe? everything the government said, every official narrative. Why wouldn't I believe it?
主持人: 你认为我们对机构失去兴趣有什么坏处吗?
Original English
主持人: Do you think there's any downside to our lost interest in institutions?
Gavin: 嗯,我对大型集中式机构持如此负面的看法。
Original English
Gavin: Well, I have such a negative view of big centralized institutions.
主持人: 为什么?
Original English
主持人: Why?
Gavin: 因为我认为,当一群人生活在一起时,一个非常好的数字大约是300人。我之所以这样说,是基于我经常居住的斐济,那里的村庄大约有300人。有一个酋长和他们住在一起。他没有特殊待遇。他不会被金马车抬着走。他必须吃和他们一样的食物。而且他通常是仁慈的。而且,因为斐济村庄的美丽之处在于,我鼓励你和你的所有观众都去看看。不要都在同一天去,因为你会把斐济搞乱,但无论如何都要去。斐济村庄的美丽之处在于,人们出生、长大、结婚、生子、死亡,都在同一所房子里,都和同一群人在一起。这太棒了,因为他们没有我生活中所拥有的,你所拥有的,那就是与所有这些无关紧要的匿名人士的互动。对吧?服务员对我来说只是一个快照,而不是一个我正在坐下来交谈的真实人物。顺便说一句,我喜欢真正与人互动,这常常以我朋友的代价为代价。我对人非常好奇。优步司机,我很好奇,但我知道这是一种临时关系。在斐济村庄,呃,这不是一种临时关系。我给你举一个飞机上的好例子。你乘坐商业航班去某个地方,你有一个10小时的航班去海外,去伦敦或其他地方,有一个婴儿在哭,呃,你对婴儿哭感到很生气。有些人是这样的。我的意思是,我和我妻子以前旅行时,我看到过这种情况,我记得有人在我们带着我20个月大的儿子登机时说:“那个婴儿会哭吗?”我对那个女人说:“你觉得呢?那是一个20个月大的婴儿。”但重点是,嘿,各位,我们接下来10个小时都在一起。我们想如何度过这段时间?我们想互相憎恨吗?我们想喝得太醉然后打扰旁边的人吗?我们想怎么做?斐济村庄就是这样。事实上,斐济村庄的浴室比波音747少,座位也比波音747少。看在上帝的份上,每天我们在飞机上遇到的人更少。所以,我信仰小群体治理。我信仰辅助性原则,你可能不知道这个词。我大约一年前才从开普敦的一位亲爱朋友那里学到它。辅助性原则意味着政府应在尽可能低的层面运作。所以,如果是一个关于建筑许可的问题,那应该是市或县的问题,与华盛顿特区无关。如果是一个关于州际贸易的问题,好吧,也许我们需要一点华盛顿特区。我们需要一点州政府的参与。但政府应在尽可能低的层面运作,这样我就可以去你家,史蒂芬,然后问:“你为什么不批准我的建筑许可?”或者我可以在我们每天早上见面的餐厅里见到你,我们的孩子一起上学。我不相信集中式政府有效。而且我进一步认为集中式政府是我们的敌人。它是公民的敌人。
Original English
Gavin: Why? Because I think what happens when you a a very good number of people to live together is about 300. And what I base that on is uh Fiji where I live a lot, villages are about 300 people. There's a chief who lives with them. He doesn't get special treatment. He's not carried around in a gold chariot. He's got to eat the same food they do. And he is generally uh benevolent. And uh because the the beauty of the Fijian village, and I encourage you you to go and all your your viewers to go. Don't all go on the same day because you'll up Fiji, but go anyway. Um the the beauty of the Fijian village is that people will be born and grow up and get married and have children and die all in the same house and all with the same people. That's fantastic because what they don't get that I get in my life and you get is the engagement with all these anonymous people that don't matter. Right? The waiter is just a snapshot to me, not a real person I'm sitting down with. I like to, by the way, really engage with people uh at the expense of of the friends I'm with very often. I'm really curious about people. The Uber driver, I'm I'm curious, but I know that the this is a temporary relationship in the Fijian village. Uh it's not a temporary relationship. I'll give you a good example on an airplane. You're on a commercial flight somewhere and you've got a 10-hour flight to overseas to London or something and there's a baby crying and uh you're pissed that the baby's crying. Some people are. I mean, I I look at this when we used to travel, my wife and I, and I remember somebody saying when we boarded with my maybe 20-month-old son, "Is that baby going to cry?" And I said to the woman, "What do you think? It's a it's a 20-month old baby." But the point is, hey folks, we're together for the next 10 hours. How do we want to spend this time? We want to spend it hating each other. We want to get too drunk and bug the person next to you. How do we want to do this? A Fijian village is like that. In fact, a Fijian village is fewer bathrooms than a 747 and fewer seats than a 747. Fewer people for God's sake, what we get on an airplane every day. And so I believe in small populations uh for governance. And I believe in subsidiarity, a word you probably don't know. I only learned it about a year ago from a dear friend in Cape Town. Subsidiarity means government at the most local possible level. So, if it's a if it's a an issue regarding building permit, that ought to be city or county, nothing to do with Washington DC. If it's an issue regarding interstate commerce, okay, maybe we need a little Washington DC. We need a little state involved. But government at the lo most local possible level so that I can come over to your house, Stephen, and say, "Why did you not approve my my building permit?" Or so I can meet you in the restaurant where we see each other every morning, where our kids go to school together. I don't believe centralized government works. And I think further that centralized government is our enemy. It is the enemy of of citizens.
主持人: 我当时在想这与商业的相似之处。
Original English
主持人: I was thinking about the parallels there actually for business.
Gavin: 它们变得太大了。
Original English
Gavin: They get too big.
主持人: 是的,它们变得太大了。很多优秀的公司实际上会拆分部门,赋予它们自主权和辅助性。我甚至说不出来。
Original English
主持人: Yeah, they get too big. And a lot of great companies actually break break up divisions and departments and give them autonomy and subsidiar. Can't even say it.
Gavin: 辅助性。对我来说也不容易。
Original English
Gavin: Subsidiary. It wasn't easy for me either.
主持人: 我第一次就说对了。你说的辅助性。辅助性。叮叮。
Original English
主持人: I nailed it first time. What you're talking about subsidiary. Subsidiarity. Bing bing.
Gavin: 辅助性。是的。
Original English
Gavin: Subsidiarity. Yeah.
主持人: 即使我们的公司在发展,也许我应该更多地思考辅助性原则。
Original English
主持人: And how even in as our company grows, maybe I should think more about subsidiarity.
Gavin: 嗯,我告诉你,我的公司最大时大约有1000人,在全国和世界各地有26个办事处,我不喜欢1000人这个数字。我喜欢我们现在的规模,大约600人,顺便说一句,我们正在招聘,所以请查找我们并来工作。我们需要年轻、身体健康、背景良好的人,这意味着他们可以通过筛选。但我的重点是,我喜欢保持在那个最佳点,1000人就开始离个人太远了。当它很小时,我不知道你现在在这个播客组织中处于什么位置,但你可以走下大厅,看到一个员工,然后说:“嘿,史蒂芬,你最近几天办公室门总是关着,你似乎因为某种原因有点封闭。怎么了?”当它变得太大时,你就会失去这种联系。当它变得非常大时,比如政府机构,像HHS,拥有世界历史上最大的预算,1.7万亿美元,比五角大楼还大,最初有8.5万名员工。幸运的是,现在减少了。你,你开玩笑吧。你正在运营一台机器。它与人性无关。政府机构与人性无关。它们与流程、官僚主义有关。
Original English
Gavin: Well, I'll tell you, my company at its biggest was about a thousand people and 26 offices around the country, around the world, and I didn't like a thousand people as a number. I liked where we are now, which is about 600 people and uh and we're hiring, by the way, so look us up and and come to work. We need we need young people uh who are physically fit and have good backgrounds, uh meaning they can pass screening. But my point is that I I like to stay in that sweet spot of a thousand people starts to get too far from the individuals. And when it's small, and I don't know where you are now in in this in in this podcast organization, but you can walk down the hall and see an employee and say, "Hey, it seems like you're you're not doing so well. You seem you don't like to joke anymore. You seem humorless. You seem such and such." In a big organization while I developed a method for that by the way I'll tell you you in a second but in a big organization you get farther and farther and farther from the human beings. I want to tell you the method we developed. We have a thing called care. It stands for continuous asking responding and evaluation. Every day every employee in my company when they log into work gets a question that they answer and I get the statistical results of that every day. And the questions will be things like uh when do you think you're getting your next promotion? Uh or um have you experienced or witnessed sexual harassment? Have you experienced or witnessed discrimination? Why do I do that? Because I want to know, right? That's why you ask. Have you in bigger companies that use our system like Amazon did developed a system like it that you know you might ask a question like have you ever seen a firearm in the workplace? An unauthorized firearm. Oh, damn it. We want to know that information, right? Does your supervisor know your name? Huge question because a supervisor knowing that question is asked knows everybody's name which is what you want. You're influencing middle management behavior. But that system we have care is no different than me walking down the hall and say, "Hey, Stephen, I noticed for the last couple of days you're keeping your office door closed and you kind of shut down for some reason. What's going on?" You lose that when it gets too big. And when it gets really too big, like think about government agencies like HHS, the biggest budget in world history, $1.7 trillion, bigger than the Pentagon, started out at 85,000 employees. Luckily, it's down now. You You got to be kidding. You're running a a machine. It has nothing to do with humanity. And and government agencies have nothing to do with humanity. They have to do with process, bureaucracy.
主持人: 我们谈到了建议。这就是我们开始这个思路的地方,你会给你的孩子什么建议,我们讨论的一个思路是关于直觉。
Original English
主持人: We talked about advice. That's kind of where we started on this uh train of thought that you would give to your children and one of the you know trains we went down was about intuition.
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yes.
主持人: 还有其他你认为,你知道,如果上帝不许,这是你生命中的最后一天,你的孩子对你说:“爸爸,我需要知道什么才能过上充实的生活?”
Original English
主持人: Is there anything else that you think was would you know if you if you if this god forbid was your last day on earth and your children said to you, "Dad, what do I need to know to live a fulfilling life?"
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yes.
主持人: 基于我们今天所看到的世界,如果你只能说一件事,你会说什么?
Original English
主持人: Based in the world as we see it today, what would you what would you say if you could only say one thing?
Gavin: 对我来说,我认为对每个人都是如此,为他人贡献是相信你属于这里的一个关键部分。我们这些经历过艰难时期的人,但请记住我说过,每个人在童年都会以某种方式经历艰难时期,自爱常常缺失或难以获得,而相信你属于这里,为他人贡献是关键。第二个,你问了一个,但你得到了两个。今天这是一个特别的优惠。第二个是我最难相信的教训,那就是对你来说正确的事情,对另一个人来说也总是正确的。
Original English
Gavin: for me and I think it's true for everybody um contribution to others is a key part of coming to believe that you belong here. Those of us who had a tough time and but remember I said everybody has a tough time in some way through childhood selflove is often uh missing or is hard to come by and to believe that you belong here contribution to others is a key thing. The second one you asked for one but you're getting two. It's a it's a special today a bargain. The second one was the hardest lesson for me to come to believe and that was that what is right for you is always right for the other person.
Gavin: 这对我来说很难理解,因为我当时想,等等。我想和这个想和我结婚生子的女孩分手。我的分手怎么可能对另一个人是正确的呢?嗯,她可以和一个真正想和她在一起的人在一起。她现在可以开始她的生活,而不是我一直和她在一起直到她45岁不能再生孩子。所以这个想法,对你来说正确的事情,对另一个人来说也总是正确的。实际应用是,史蒂芬,你只需要知道什么对你来说是正确的。
Original English
Gavin: Very hard for me to get my head around this one because I thought, well, wait a minute. I want to break up with this girl who wants to get married and have kids with me. How can my breaking up be right for the other person? Well, a she gets to be with somebody who actually wants to be with her. she gets to begin her life now instead of I stay with her till she's 45 and she can't have kids anymore. So this idea that what's right for you is always right for the other person. The practical application is that all you need to do, Stephen, is know what's right for you,
主持人: 这说起来容易做起来难。
Original English
主持人: which is easier said than done.
Gavin: 说起来容易做起来难,但因为在我的案例中,我会说:“嗯,这个人会怎么样?”当我年轻时,我曾相信我解雇的每一个人,例如,在我职业生涯中解雇的人很少。我的意思是,我雇佣了很多人,但我很少解雇人。我解雇的每一个人,我都认为他们从我创立的这家伟大公司辞职后,会流落街头无家可归,养不起家人。但事实并非如此。他们去了其他很棒的工作。如果他们能为GDBA工作,他们已经通过了那么多考验。他们仪表堂堂。他们很聪明。他们身体健康。他们有很好的背景。我们能看到他们有正直。他们有各种各样的优点。而且他们表现得非常好,因为我们有一个非常严格的筛选过程。我们有一个9天的面试,而不是1小时的面试。他们来我们的营地住9天进行面试。他们睡在我们的环境中。我们真正了解他们。顺便说一句,现在是12天,但最初是9天。所以现在我知道,如果我解雇某人,或者他们离开,他们会做得非常出色。那对我来说是一个很大的觉醒。但这个想法,对你来说正确的事情,对另一个人来说也总是正确的,它有什么作用?它让你知道,要找到这个问题的答案,我唯一需要去的地方就是这里。你不想让我在你的大脑里瞎搞,试图弄清楚你想要什么,试图弄清楚你相信什么,试图弄清楚什么对你最好。我一生中,试图弄清楚什么对别人最好,伤害的人比帮助的人更多。
Original English
Gavin: It is easier said than done, but because in my case, what I would do is say, well, what how's this person going to do? When I was younger, I believed everybody that I fired, for example, which was very few people in my career. I mean, employed a shitload of people, but I didn't fire very often. Everybody that I fired, I thought they went from working at this great company that I was the founder of to being on the street homeless and couldn't feed their families. That's not what happened. They went to other great jobs. If they could work for GDBA, they had already jumped through so many hoops. They were presentable. They were intelligent. They were physically fit. They had a a great background. They had integrity that we could see. They had all variety of of things. And they presented incredibly well because we've got one hell of a screening process. We have a 9-day nine-day interview, not a 1-hour interview. They live they come and live at our camp for 9 days of an interview process. They're sleeping in our environment. We're really getting to know them. By the way, it's 12 days now, but started as 9 days. So now I know if I fire somebody or if they leave, uh, they're going to do fantastic. That that was a big awakening for me. But this idea that what's right for me is always right for the other person, what does it do? It frees you to know that the only place I have to go to get the answer to this question is in here. You don't want me messing around in your brain trying to figure out what you want, trying to figure out what you believe, trying to figure out what's best for you. I've hurt more people in my life, trying to figure out what's best for them than I've helped.
主持人: 这,嗯,非常真实。我只是在与一些人进行比较,在一个特别的案例中,我解雇了一个人,他们对此非常不满,很多很多年前,在以前的公司里,他们非常不满,抗议,你知道,对我说了些话,然后几年后,五六年,十年后,当我反思他们现在在哪里,以及那是否对他们是最好的事情时,老实说,我有点假设是这样,他们会说那对他们是最好的事情,我也会说那对他们是最好的事情,事后看来,部分原因是因为。
Original English
主持人: It is um it is remarkably true. I was just sort of senseing it against people where in one particular case where I had fired someone and they were very upset about it many many many years ago in a previous business very upset about it protested you know said some things uh to me and then years later five six 10 years later when I reflect on where they are now and if that was the best thing for them as I kind of assumed it was to be honest they would say it was the best thing for them I would say it was the best thing for them in hindsight in part because
Gavin: 当他们被困在一个不适合他们的境地时。他们会以其他方式受苦。
Original English
Gavin: when held in a situation that's not right for them. They're going to suffer in other ways.
主持人: 是的。
Original English
主持人: Yeah.
Gavin: 在一个标准之下,包括你的怨恨。
Original English
Gavin: Under the under a standard, including your resentment.
主持人: 我的怨恨,一个他们无法达到的标准,他们无法实现的目标,来自所有人的压力,当他们看不到自己的工作时,当然会有压力。
Original English
主持人: My resentment, a standard they can't meet, goals they can't meet, the pressure from everybody, the stress when they can't see their job, of course.
Gavin: 是的,让他们走,他们就开始了自己的事业。而且,压力更小,目标更低,期望更少。他们似乎快乐得多。
Original English
Gavin: And yeah, and let them go and they started their own thing. And um less pressure, lower goals, less expectation. They seem to be much much happier.
主持人: 而且你,哦,快乐得多。
Original English
主持人: And you Oh, much happier.
Gavin: 而且你,是的。这就是,看,上帝或者宇宙,无论你想用哪个词来形容,只让你对一个人负责。真正只对一个人负责,那就是你自己,然后这当然会产生所有对世界其他部分的连锁反应,甚至我们的孩子,顺便说一句,我们对他们负责吗?当然不是一辈子,对吧?因为在我的案例中,我是一个年长的父亲,我的第一个亲生孩子,我有很多领养的孩子,很多,我有八个,但我的第一个亲生孩子,我当时52岁,所以我对我17岁的儿子来说是一个年长的父亲,我预计他长大后我不会在身边。
Original English
Gavin: And you Yeah. That's the Look, God only made you or the universe, whichever word you want to fit in there, only made you responsible for one person. truly responsible for one person and and that's you and then that has of course all the ripple effects of what it does for the rest of the world even our children by the way are we responsible for them certainly not for life right because in my case I'm an older father my first birth kid I had a bunch of adopted kids a bunch I had eight but my first uh birth kid uh I was 52 years old and so I'm an older father to my 17-year-old son uh I don't expect to be around when he's
Gavin: 嗯,如果那样的话,我会接受。但到那时我可能已经衰老了。呃,我宁愿在那之前离开。但我的重点是,即使是我们的孩子,我们也不会找到答案。我知道什么对我的孩子最好吗?当然不知道。我有很多看法,但,你知道,我真的知道什么最好吗?不。但我知道什么对我最好。而这才是我的责任必须结束的地方。史蒂芬,你让我把它归结为一点。我今天给了你一个特别的优惠,两点。而且,呃,我想给你第三点,你没有要求的。那就是这个。你想要的一切都在下游。你想要的一切都在下游。意思是,当我们逆流而上,想着:“哦,如果这很重要,那将需要所有这些努力等等。”没有逆流而上。什么?下游总是赢。现实总是赢。你知道,当你逆流而上时,你投入足够的力气,你却停留在原地。所以,在我生命中,那些我曾认为“必须是这样。必须是这样。这是唯一的办法”的时候。我错了。我错了。包括雇佣我的一位亲爱朋友给我讲了一个故事,他为他的公司,一家大公司,雇佣了一位CEO,那个人说:“我接受这份工作。”他们谈判了所有事情。然后那个人说:“你知道,我要去百事可乐工作,对不起。”我的朋友坐飞机去了酒店,在大堂等。他知道那个人在酒店大堂,在大堂抓住了他,说:“不要去他们那里工作。来为我工作。我将以以下方式改变报价。我将增加股权。”他成功了,他得到了他想要的CEO。三周后不得不解雇他。
Original English
Gavin: Um, I'll take it if it happens to be that way. But I would be def crepit by that point. Uh, and I I'd rather probably exit before that. But my point is the idea that even our children, we will not find the answer. Do I know what's best for my kids? Of course not. I have a lot of opinions, but uh, you know, do I really know what's best? No. But I know what's best for me. And and that's really where my responsibility has to end. And Stephen, you asked me to boil it down to one. I gave you a special today of two. And uh and I want to give you uh the third one that you haven't asked for. And it's this. Everything you want is downstream. Everything you want is downstream. Meaning that time when we're swimming against the current and think, oh, if it's important, it's going to take all this work, etc., etc. There is no swimming upstream. What? Downstream always wins. Reality always wins. You know, when you swim upstream, you put enough current there and you're staying in the same place. And so, the times in my life when I thought it must be this way. It has to be this. This there's a this is the only way. I was wrong. I was wrong. Including hiring a dear friend of mine told me the story of hiring a CEO for his company, big company, and and the guy said, "I'll take the job." And they negotiated everything. And then the guy said, "You know, I'm going to go to work for for Pepsi Cola, and I'm sorry." And my friend got on an airplane and flew to the hotel and waited in the lobby. the of the hotel where he knew the guy was, caught him in the lobby and said, "Don't go to work for them. Go to work for me. I'll change the offer in the following way. I'll add this equity." And he succeeded and he got the CEO he wanted. And three weeks later had to fire the
Gavin: 所以基本上,当整个宇宙都说“不”的时候,你想要的一切都在下游。现在,你可能有一些,你告诉我,你对这个想法有一些抵触吗?嗯,我会说,我能想到一些例子,我为某事而奋斗,或者我为某个人而奋斗,结果证明那是一个好决定。我应该给你背景吗?
Original English
Gavin: So basically, when the whole universe says no, everything you want is downstream. Now, you probably have some, you tell me, do you have some resistance to that idea? Um, I would say I can think of examples where I fought for something and it was I fought for a person or something and it turned out to be a good decision. Should I give you the context?
主持人: 是的,我很想听听背景。但顺便说一句,那并不能驳倒我的论点,因为为某事而奋斗与逆流而上不同。你知道,逆流而上是你明知道这条河往哪个方向流。
Original English
主持人: Yeah, I'd love to hear the context. But by the way, that doesn't defeat my argument because fighting for something is not the same as swimming upstream. You know, swimming upstream is you know which way this river is going.
Gavin: 哦,是的。是的,那就有道理了。
Original English
Gavin: Oh, yeah. Yeah, that makes sense then.
主持人: 是的。所以,你问我我会告诉我的孩子什么,那就是你想要的一切都在下游。这有点,你知道,我一生中如此幸运或幸运,无论你想用哪个词,或者说有福,我的工作,你有很多书作为例子。我喜欢做这件事。这不是工作。我喜欢,有时很难,但难与感觉像我只是在工厂里盖章生产东西不同,那对我来说是一种地狱。呃,我喜欢,我正在做我来到这个星球上要做的事情。我认为不是每个人都那么幸运。
Original English
主持人: Yeah. And so the the you ask what I would tell my kids is that everything you want is downstream. It kind of you know I've been so blessed or lucky whatever word you want to use or fortunate in my life that my work you've got all these books as examples. I loved doing it. It wasn't work. I love sometimes it's hard but hard is not the same as like feeling like I'm just stamping something out in this factory which would be a kind of hell for me I guess. Uh, I loved I I was doing what I was on the planet to do. I think everybody isn't that lucky.
Gavin: 我要给你的例子实际上支持了这个故事。是的。请继续。
Original English
Gavin: The example I was going to give you actually support the story. Yes. Go ahead.
主持人: 我和我的女朋友当时交往了一年。我们有一个问题。我对此非常开放,报纸也报道过等等,但我们在亲密生活方面有一个问题,我们真的看不到解决办法。然后分手了。
Original English
主持人: Me and my me and my then girlfriend were dating for a year. We had an issue. I've been very open about this and the newspapers write about it and stuff, but we had an issue with our intimate life and we couldn't really see a way around it. Broke up.
主持人: 她飞去了巴厘岛,因为我们看不到解决问题的办法。然后我继续我的生活,一年过去了,我一直在想,我一直在想,你知道吗?我其实觉得那个人是对的。
Original English
主持人: She flew to Bali because we couldn't see a way to solve the problem. And then I carried on with my life and a year goes past and I'm thinking constantly, I'm thinking, do you know what? I think actually that was the right person.
主持人: 我想我搞砸了。我想我应该,也许在我还不成熟的时候,我应该找到解决这个问题的办法。所以我飞了18个小时,跨越世界去了巴厘岛,去向她道歉,因为我没有以更成熟的方式更好地处理情况。我道歉了。我想我有一部分是想让她回来。实际上,我们在那里的时候,她确实告诉我,在我们分开的这段时间里,她和别人在一起了,我对此表现得非常好,我非常成熟,然后我们在那里的时候,我知道她没有试图,她没有试图坐在我旁边,所以当我们和朋友一起吃晚饭时,她坐在离我两个座位远的地方,她就像对我没有兴趣了。
Original English
主持人: I think I up. I think I should have maybe in my immaturity I like should have found a way to work through this problem. So I fly across the world to Bali for 18 hours and I go there to apologize to her for not handling the situation better in a more mature way. I I apologize. I think there is part of me that's trying to get her back. actually while we're there she does tell me that in the time we've been apart she's been with someone else and I take it all very very well I'm very mature and then while we're there I know she's not trying she's not trying to like sit next to me so when we go for dinner with our friends she's like sitting two seats down she's like there's no interest in me anymore
主持人: 所以我接受了,我告诉她我两天后要回家了,非常感谢你花时间陪我,我给她发了一条很好的短信,然后在我航班前的48小时里。
Original English
主持人: so I accept it and I tell her I'm going home in in 2 days time thank you so much for spending time I send her this nice text message and then in those in the 48 hours before my flight
主持人: 就像我们又重新爱上了对方。所以,这支持了你的观点,因为当我道歉时,我没有任何目的,然后我说:“我要走了。”
Original English
主持人: it's like we fell in love with each other again. So, it supports your point because when I apologized, I came with no agenda and then I said, "I'm leaving."
主持人: 在我说了“我现在要走了”之后,给她发了一条很好的短信,在48小时内,我们就像又重新爱上了对方。她现在是我的未婚妻。
Original English
主持人: In the 48 hours from the point where I said, "I'm off now." Sent her a nice message. It's like we fell in love again. She's now my fianceé
主持人: 我不知道。已经七年了还是什么的。但它实际上证明了你所说的。现在我仔细想了想,因为我以为飞行是我在为某事而奋斗,因为你举的例子,但实际上。
Original English
主持人: and that's what I don't know. It's been seven years or something. But it actually goes to show what you said. Now I thought it through cuz I thought flying was me fighting for something because of the example you gave, but actually
主持人: 是我道歉了,然后我放弃了。我停止了奋斗。
Original English
主持人: it was I apologized and I'd given up. I like stopped fighting.
Gavin: 那是最好的,当你放手的时候。然后突然间,它就发生了。是的,它确实符合。你想要的一切都在下游。事实上,那,你知道,甚至登上飞机也是下游。
Original English
Gavin: That's the best when you when you let it go. And suddenly and suddenly it happens. Yes, it does fit. Everything you want is downstream. In fact, that that's not, you know, even getting on a plane is downstream.
主持人: 你没有乘坐一架倒着飞或者没有引擎的飞机。我说的就是当你发现自己,我当然在我的生活中也发现过,发现自己正在做一些非常困难的事情,而且毫无回报,感觉就像我在逆流而上,我可以告诉你,根据在很多河流中,其中一些在斐济的经验,这行不通。逆流而上你走不了多远。
Original English
主持人: You didn't get on a plane that flies backwards or has no engines. That's what I'm talking about is when you find yourself, and I certainly have in my life, find myself doing something that is so difficult to do uh and and so unrewarding and it feels like I'm trying to swim upstream, which I can tell you from experience in lots of rivers, some of them in Fiji, it doesn't work. You you don't get a lot of mileage swimming upstream.
主持人: 我只是想问,因为你知道,这本书是如此畅销。
Original English
主持人: I was just going to ask cuz you know, this this was such a smash hit bestselling book.
Gavin: 是的。
Original English
Gavin: Yeah.
主持人: 全国畅销。我只是想问你一个问题。
Original English
主持人: Nationally. And I was just going to ask you the question,
主持人: 为什么?是什么引起了人们的共鸣,让这本书如此成功?《恐惧的礼物》,保护我们免受暴力的生存信号。它是什么?
Original English
主持人: why? What is it that resonated with people that made this book so successful? The gift of fear, survival signals that protect us from violence. What What is it?
Gavin: 这是一个很好的问题。我的意思是,这是一个很好的问题,因为它是一个新问题。我告诉你我希望什么。我想如果那本书是关于中国陶器,或者关于香料,或者任何主题的木工,它也会很成功,因为它得到了许多祝福,它有一些核心真理在里面,就像你没有,我告诉他们的一件事是忘记专家,你不需要专家告诉你你身体里已经有的东西,如果这个故事对你产生共鸣,如果我采访的这些人的经历对你产生共鸣,如果这对你有效,那么,你知道,你会在其中找到价值,而且有一些实际原因让它成为畅销书,比如奥普拉的推荐。我的意思是,所有人都推荐了它。《时代》杂志、《新闻周刊》,所有人都对这本书做了大量报道。为什么在那一刻它会成功?我有一个理论,那就是很多媒体人都认识我或者听说过我,但我从未做过任何公开的事情,这需要很大的勇气,对我来说,我在那本书中谈论了非常私人的事情,以及其他书中也是如此,这需要很大的勇气,事实上,我事先见了两位作者,他们讲述了他们生活中非常艰难的故事,呃,我不认识他们,我只是要求见面,其中一位在华盛顿特区,呃,我得到了一些鼓励。顺便说一句,我还记得与一群执法官员会面,他们出于某种原因在我的公司,我给他们讲了书中的几个故事,呃,童年故事,他们都惊呆了。每个人都说:“哦,这并没有激发桌上的任何对话。”我知道我进入了一个大多数人都会逃避的领域。这也帮助了我,因为我认为,否认、否认、否认、否认、否认,桌子周围都是否认,因为每个警察和每个FBI特工都有一个故事,解释他们为什么做他们正在做的事情,就像每个医生一样,就像每个人一样。他们做他们正在做的事情是有原因的,这通常可以在童年时期发现。当他们发现它时,比如你想要一个心脏外科医生,你想要一个祖父在他14岁时死于心脏病发作的心脏外科医生吗?还是你想要一个说心脏外科手术?哦,心脏外科手术的收入看起来真的很好。我将选择心脏外科手术作为我的专业。你知道,你想要一个有核心故事,一个个人故事的人。
Original English
Gavin: That's a very good question. I mean, a good question in that it's in that it's a new question. I'll give you what I what I hope. I think if that book had been about Chinese pottery uh or about spices or any subject carpentry um it also would have worked well because it had by a number of blessings it had some core truths in it like you didn't one of the things I'm saying to them is forget about experts you you don't need an expert to be telling you things that are in your own body if this story is resonant to you if this experience from all these people that I interviewed is resonant to you and if that works for then uh you know you'll find value here and uh there are some practical reasons why it was a bestseller like Oprah doing it. I mean everybody did it. Time magazine, Newsweek, everybody did big things on the book. Why at that moment did that work out? I I have a theory which is that a a lot of people in media knew me or knew of me but I never had done anything public and it it took a lot of courage to do and when I for me I talk about things that were very personal in that book and uh and in the other books as well and it took a lot of courage in fact I went and met with two authors beforehand who had told really hard stories about their lives and uh I didn't know them I just asked for meetings one of them was in DC and uh and and I got some encouragement. I also remember, by the way, meeting with a group of of law enforcement officials who were at my company for some reason, and I told them a couple of stories from that book, uh childhood stories, and they were kind of a gasast. Everybody was like, "Oh, it didn't stimulate any conversation at the table." I knew I was in a kind of territory that most people run away from. And that too helped me uh because I thought uh denial, denial, denial, denial, denial all around the table because every cop and every FBI agent has a story about why they are doing what they're doing just like every doctor does, just like everybody does. There's a reason that they're doing what they're doing that usually will be discoverable in uh in childhood. And when they discover it, like who do you want for example for a heart surgeon? Do you want the heart surgeon whose grandfather died of a heart attack in his arms when he was 14 years old? Or do you want the one who said heart surgery? Oh, the earnings look really good on heart surgery. I'll take heart surgery as my major. Uh you know, you want the one with a with a core uh with a with a story uh a personal story.
存在的目的与生命的意义
主持人: 我们有一个结束传统,上一位嘉宾会为下一位嘉宾留下一个问题。留给你的问题,不知道他们是为谁留的,是“你认为你的目的和意义的起源客观上来自哪里?”
Original English
主持人: We have a closing tradition where the last guest leaves a question for the next. And the question left for you, not knowing who they were leaving it for, is where do you think the origin of your purpose and meaning comes from objectively?
Gavin: 好的,给我25分钟的沉默。这,我想,有点像一个精神上的答案,那就是我相信一切都是注定的。意思是,小镇上最小的树,最小的地方,呃,它就是那样注定的。现在,我有一个科学版本,那就是如果你,我记得有一天我在斐济,我在我家门前游泳,我家门前的海水只有四英尺深,因为它在珊瑚礁上,所以你可以在上面走,然后你走到珊瑚礁的尽头,你就到了深水区,我当时站在四英尺深的水里,突然一场巨大的暴雨来了,就像“砰砰”地打在你头上,然后它立即停了,紧接着,一大群鱼,大约这么大,就开始在我面前跳出水面,很吵。就像它们在四处游动,然后它们在我周围形成一个完整的圆圈,然后它们就消失了。紧接着,潮水,当时正在上涨,你知道,每天涨落两次。呃,潮水在我站的地方变得非常强劲,它是涨潮而不是退潮。所以我当时真的像这样站着,我环顾四周,我想:“兄弟,这最好能给你足够的刺激。”就像我刚刚看到了一场巨大的暴雨,然后是太阳,鱼群疯狂跳跃,然后是巨大的潮水。我刚想到这些,一头鲸鱼就在珊瑚礁旁边跃出水面,对吧?而且,呃,我当时想:“天哪。你正在看一部精彩绝伦的电影。”然后我想,事实上,那天晚上我做了一个梦,我梦见自己,呃,就好像有人输入了:“给我看看站在斐济的珊瑚礁上会是什么样子。”那时还没有AI,但想象一下站在斐济的珊瑚礁上,一大群鱼在你周围跳跃,一场巨大的风暴开始,然后很快放晴,然后看到一头鲸鱼在你面前跃出水面,而你正试图抓住珊瑚礁,它如此强大,你几乎站不住脚。Google,给我看看那是什么样子。而我,Gavin,就像上帝、宇宙的眼睛,无论它可能是什么,你可能会想,一个42岁的男人,今天吃了什么,这次珊瑚礁之旅,这个童年,这个经历,会是什么样子?一切都是注定的吗?我确实相信是。所以这个问题的答案是,我相信这超出了我的掌控。我可能会有选择,呃,你知道,有自由意志吗?有些东西摆在我面前,向左走,向右走,呃,我可能会有选择,但摆在我面前的东西,摆在我面前的东西,不由我决定。
Original English
Gavin: Okay, give me 25 minutes of silence. This is I guess it's somewhat of a spiritual answer uh which is that I believe in I I tend to go with everything is predetermined meaning down to the smallest tree in the smallest town in the smallest place uh it's going to be that's how it was going to be. Now, I have a scientific version of this, which is that if you're I remember one day I was in Fiji and I was swimming in front of my house and the the water's just 4t deep in front of my house because it's on a reef so you can walk on it and then you get to the end of the reef, you get to the deep water and I was standing in the in the 4ft deep water and suddenly a massive rainstorm came just like theop bop, you know, hitting you in the head and then it stopped immediately and immediately after that this massive school of fish about this big just started jumping out of the water in front of me and it's noisy. IT'S LIKE as they were going around and they go in a whole circle around me and then they're and then they're gone. And immediately after this the tide which was rising, it goes up and down as you know twice a day. Um the tide really got strong where I was standing and it was coming in as opposed to going out. And so I was really like standing there like this and I was looking around and I thought, "This better be enough stimulation for you, brother. Like I'd just seen the giant rainstorm and then the sun, the fish going nuts and then this giant tide thing." And as soon as I thought that, a whale breached right off the reef, right? And uh and I and I thought, "Holy man. You are seeing one hell of a movie here." And then I thought, in fact, I dreamed that night that I was uh as if somebody had typed in, "Show me what it would be like to be standing on a reef in Fiji." Uh there was no AI then, but to be standing on a reef in Fiji and have a massive school of fish go jumping up around you, have a, you know, huge storm begin, have it quickly get sunny, and then see a whale breach in front of you as you're trying to hold on to the reef is is is, you know, so strong you can barely stand up. Show me what that's like, Google. And that I Gavin was like the eyes of God, universe, whatever it may be that you could like what is it like to be a 42year-old man who's had this diet this day, this trip out to the reef, this childhood, this experience? Is it all predetermined? And I do believe it is. And so the answer to that question is I believe it's out of my hands. I may get the choices uh you know is there free will something is presented to me go left go right uh I I might get the choice but what is presented to me what is presented to me is not up to me.
主持人: 你是说生命是意识在试图理解自己吗?有人曾经这样对我说,那是一个相当引人深思的想法。
Original English
主持人: Are you telling me that life is consciousness trying to understand itself. Someone said that to me once and it was quite a compelling thought.
Gavin: 这个想法如此迅速地进入我的脑海,就像一份新闻报道,说:“世界就是这样运作的。”某种东西,或者某个人,或者所有人,或者所有事物,都在Google中输入他们想看到的东西,偶尔你就是它所运作的身体,因为如果宇宙的其他部分,顺便说一句,我们现在所处的这个时刻很有趣,史蒂芬,因为我的那个经历现在正在通过你和你的问题以及这个播客传达给数百万人。所以现在你确实知道站在水里,水流试图把你冲走,看到一大群鱼在你周围游动,看到一头鲸鱼就在你面前跃出水面,看到这场巨大的暴雨在几分钟内来去匆匆,会是什么感觉。呃,现在你得到了那段经历的一小部分。现在我是否认为,这是重点。我是否认为我创造了那段经历?绝不。我不认为。我认为它是注定的。而且我认为,我告诉过你科学版本是,你会问我这个问题,而这就是你会得到的答案。这就是我所相信的,基于我今天吃了什么,基于我40年前吃了什么,基于童年,基于你是谁,我是谁。这就是你会得到的答案。
Original English
Gavin: The idea was dropped into my skull so quickly like it was a journalistic report that said here's the way the world works. something or somebody or everybody or everything types into Google what it wants to see and occasionally you are the body that it works through because if the rest of the universe and by the way kind of interesting this very moment we're in Stephen because that experience I had is now being relayed to a few million people courtesy of you and your question and that question in this podcast. So now you do know a little bit about what it's like to stand in the water with the the current trying to pull you over and see a whole school of fish go around you and see a whale breach right in front of you and see this this massive rainstorm come and go in a matter of minutes. Uh now you get a little piece of that experience. Now do I think here's the big the punchline. Do I think I created that experience? No way. I don't. I think it's predetermined. And I think the I said to you the scientific version is you're gonna ask me this question and that's the answer you're going to get. That's what I believe based on what I ate today, based on what I ate 40 years ago, based on childhood, based on who you are and who I am. That's the answer you're going to get.
主持人: 还有谁留下了这个问题。
Original English
主持人: And who left the question
Gavin: 还有谁留下了它,他们那天过得怎么样,他们那天吃了什么,以及所有其他事情。我相信宿命论。它,嗯,它来自我在印度的一位老师,我生命中最好的老师尼萨拉达写了一本书叫**《我就是那个》,推荐给所有人,然后他的学生,现在已经去世了,罗梅什·巴萨卡,我有机会去印度**看望他并和他在一起,他是我重要的老师,他基本上说。
Original English
Gavin: and who left it and how their day was and what they ate that day and everything else. I believe in predetermination. It is um it comes from a teacher of mine in India my best teacher in life Nisarada wrote a book called I am that recommended to everybody and then his student who's now died uh Romesh Basakar who I got to go see and spend time with in India who was an important teacher for me who basically said
Gavin: 每天早上9点。他家里基本上有萨桑(satsang)。人们可以来提问。呃,呃,而且他碰巧是印度人,但它有点佛教性质。有人问他:“那么,你只是说我们都是机器人吗?”他说:“是的,完全正确。我们都是机器人。”然后那个人说:“那么,我早上为什么要起床呢?”他说:“试试看。试试待在床上。”他说:“几天后,你就会起床活动了。你会做些事情。你会受到激励去做些事情。”所以,嗯,这就是我对你问题的回答,显然,呃,我只是在这一秒钟听到这个问题,答案也只是在这一秒钟才出现。
Original English
Gavin: every day at 9:00 a.m. He had satsang in his house basically. People could come and ask questions. Uh uh and and it was sort of he he happened to be Indian but it was sort of Buddhist in nature. And somebody said to him, "Well, are you just saying we're all robots?" And he said, "YES, EXACTLY CORRECT. We're all robots." And then the person said, "Well, why should I even get out of bed in the morning?" And he said, "Try it. Try and stay in bed." And he said, "After a few days, you'll be up and about. You'll be doing something. You'll be motivated to do something." So um that is my answer to your question which obviously uh I only heard this second and the answer only came this second.
主持人: Gavin,谢谢你。谢谢你以如此多的方式开阔了我的眼界。你写了这么多好书。我都会在下面链接。这里最新的一本叫做**《禁忌事实:政府关于儿童疫苗导致脑损伤的欺骗与压制》。这里还有一本关于儿童的书。《保护天赋:确保儿童和青少年安全,让父母保持理智》。《恐惧的礼物:保护我们免受暴力的生存信号》**。
Original English
主持人: Kevin, thank you. Thank you for opening my eyes in so many ways. You've written so many of these great books. All of them I'm going to link below. The newest one here is called Forbidden Facts: Government Deceit and Suppression about Brain Damage from Childhood Vaccines. There's another book about children here. Protecting the the gift, keeping children and teenagers safe and parents sane. The Gift of Fear, survival signals that protect us from violence.
Gavin: 我认为你只需要链接这三本。我的理由是这些都是专业书籍。
Original English
Gavin: And I think those are the only three you need to link. And my reason is these are kind of specialty books
主持人: 补充。好的,没问题。所以,我会在下面链接这些,供大家查看。嗯,我强烈建议大家去看看Gavin的所有作品。嗯,这些都会在下面的评论区,如果有人想阅读更多关于我们今天涉及的一些事情。你今天提到了所有这些书,但如果你想深入了解任何这些主题,这是你的机会。还有其他地方人们可以找到你吗,如果他们对你感兴趣?
Original English
主持人: additions. Okay, fine. So, I'll link these below for everyone to see. Um, I highly recommend checking all of Gavin's work work out. Um, and these are going to be in the comment section below if if anyone wants to read more about some of the things we've touched on. You've touched on all these books today, but if you want to go deeper on any of these subjects, this is your opportunity to do so. And is there anywhere else people can go to find you if they're interested in your
Gavin: 我的意思是,我们的网站是gdba.com,可能gavanddebecker.com也行。这个网站我甚至不招揽新客户。我们没有任何营销之类的东西。这个网站只有一个目的,那就是吸引求职者,因为我们一直在大量招聘。所以这就是网站的作用,但那里可能还有其他对人们有价值的信息。我不知道。
Original English
Gavin: I mean our website is gdba.com and probably gavanddebecker.com works. The website is I don't even solicit new clients. We don't have any marketing or anything like that. The website is there for one purpose which is attracting candidates for employment because we are hiring a lot of people all the time. So that's what the website does but there may be other information there that's valuable for people. I don't know.
主持人: 嗯,如果有人年轻、健康、强壮,想和Gavin一起工作,那么,嗯,我也会在下面链接网站,查看所有可用的职位。Gavin,非常感谢你。这当然,我的意思是,有很多事情让我大开眼界,但对我来说最重要的事情之一实际上就是关于直觉的这个教训,以及更多地倾听它,以及在我的直觉告诉我一些事情时,更坦诚地对待别人。
Original English
主持人: Well, if anyone's young and fit and strong and wants to work with Gavin, then um I'll link the website below as well to see all of the jobs available. Gavin, thank you so much. It's certainly I mean there's so many things that blow my mind, but one one of the most important things for me is actually just this lesson about intuition and that even and that to listen to it more and to be more upfront with people when I my intuition isn't is telling me something
Gavin: 因为你说得对。我认为我们都非常擅长,嗯,调低我们直觉的音量,社会似乎教会我们自我欺骗和反复猜测。Gavin,谢谢你。
Original English
Gavin: because you're right. I think we're we're all very good at um tuning the volume of our intuition down and society kind of teaches us to gaslight ourselves and double guess. Gavin, thank you.
Gavin: 呃,也谢谢你,谢谢你所做的一切。你也是我的老师之一。年轻人,我71岁了,我可以这样说。
Original English
Gavin: Uh thank you too and thanks for what you're doing. You are one of my teachers as well. Young man, I get to say at 71.
主持人: 谢谢你。YouTube有这个新的疯狂算法,他们根据AI和你所有的观看行为,精确地知道你接下来想看哪个视频。算法说这个视频对你来说是完美的视频。对现在正在观看的每个人来说都不同。
Original English
主持人: Thank you. YouTube have this new crazy algorithm where they know exactly what video you would like to watch next based on AI and all of your viewing behavior. And the algorithm says that this video is the perfect video for you. It's different for everybody looking right now.
📌 文中提及的人物和组织
人物: Jeffrey Epstein, Jeff Bezos
公司/组织: US government, Saudi Arabian government, CIA, FBI
产品/模型: Pegasus 3, ChatGPT, Whisper Flow
媒体/书籍: Forbidden Facts, The Gift of Fear, 1984, I Am That