(单词翻译:单击)
听力文本
Here now, Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, a member of the Senate judiciary committee. Senator, always good to have you here. Thank you for coming in tonight. Thank you, Martha. This is a tweet I want to put a from Elizabeth Warren and you guys see eye to eye on this. She says "We already knew the FTC's $5 billion settlement with Facebook was a drop in the bucket penalty and the fine print proves that it is a joke." Do you agree? Yes, but I don't think you're gonna solve this problem with the FTC. Congress is gonna have to weigh in on this. I mean, Facebook is no longer a company, it's a country. Two billion users. It can influence what we think, what we believe, how we vote, what we buy. Even how we feel. Their business model is we give up all of our personal information, very valuable. In return, for us being able to see what our high school friends had for dinner on Saturday -- That's right. Yeah. I'm OK with that as long as people understand what they're giving up and what I think we need to do is pass a bill that says, number one, you own your data.
Number two, you can license it to Facebook, but the licensing has to be knowing, it has to be willful, you have to know what -- they have to tell you what they're doing with it. Right now, their terms and conditions are about eight pages, single-spaced, nobody reads it. You could hide a dead body in there, nobody would ever find it. My bill would say look, you've got to write it in plain English. If you change your mind, you can opt out. Yeah. Your data is portable. You are entitled to see a copy of your data. And if people are willing to do that, this is America, I say fine, but the consent, Martha, has got to be knowing and it's got to be willful. Yeah. I mean, everybody thought social media was the greatest thing since sliced bread until they realize that that is the trade-off. Exactly what you said. Well, the other -- You don't get anything for nothing. The other problem is that we need a better understanding of social medias algorithms. Absolutely. Now they say they are not shading the truth in terms of what we see, but 60 percent of their users use Facebook as a primary new source. And that's one of the reasons the DOJ is looking into it as well. Yeah.
译文由可可原创，仅供学习交流使用，未经许可请勿转载。
参考翻译
现在我们与路易斯安那州的参议员约翰·肯尼迪对话，他还是参议院司法委员会的成员。参议员，您能来这里，我们总是很高兴的。感谢您今晚能来到这里。谢谢你，玛莎。我想展示一条伊丽莎白·沃伦发的推特，并且你们的看法一致。她表示：“我们已经知道，联邦贸易委员会的与脸书的50亿美元协议简直是九牛一毛，合同细则也是一个笑话。”您同意吗？是的，但我认为依靠联邦贸易委员会就可以解决这个问题。国会必须要谈谈这件事。我是说，脸书不再是一个公司，它是一个国家。200万用户。它可以影响我们的想法、我们的信仰、我们如何投票以及我们购买什么商品。甚至会影响到我们的感受。他们的商业模式是：我们放弃了我们全部的个人信息，非常宝贵。作为回报，我们可以看到我们高中时的朋友周六晚饭吃了什么——对，是的。我对这一点感觉还好，只要人们明白他们放弃的是什么，我认为我们需要通过一项法案，上面规定，第一，你拥有你自己的资料。
第二，你可以把它特许给脸书，但是，许可必须被知悉，它应该是自愿的，你必须知悉——他们必须告诉你他们用它在做什么。现在，他们的条款有8页左右，并且是单倍行距，根本没有人读。你把一具尸体藏在里面都没有人会发现。我的法案上可能会写道，你要用通俗英语来写。如果你改主意了，可以选择退出。是的。你的资料是可以移动的。你有权看到你资料的副本。如果人们愿意这样做，这是美国，我说可以，但是玛莎，准许必须被知悉，而且是自愿的。是的。我是说，人人都觉得社交媒体是自切片面包之后出现的最棒的东西，而当他们意识到这是一种取舍时，就不会这么想了。确实是您说的那样。那么，另一个——你不可能不劳而获。另一个问题在于，我们需要非常了解社交媒体算法。当然。现在，他们表示，就我们看到的而言，他们并没有掩盖真相，但60%的用户把脸书当做主要的新来源。这正是司法部正在调查此事的原因之一。是的。
