I came to talk about first principles and communities that I love
今天来到这里，我想和大家谈谈一些首要原则和我热爱的一些城市，
especially East Palo Alto, California, which is full of amazing people.
尤其是东帕罗奥图，它位于加利福尼亚，那里人才济济。
It's also a community that's oddly separated by the 101 freeway that runs through Silicon Valley.
但这个城市被一条穿过硅谷的101国道硬生生隔开。
On the west side of the freeway in Palo Alto are the "haves,"
在这条高速路的西侧，是“无所不有”的帕罗奥图，
on just about any dimension you can think of: education, income, access to water.
只要你想得到的，都能在这里找到：优越的教育，可观的收入，丰富的水资源。
On the east side of the freeway are the "have-nots."
而这条高速路的东侧，则是“一无所有”的帕罗奥图。
And even if you don't know East Palo Alto, you might know the story of eastside disparity,
即使你没听说过东帕罗奥图，你也许听过其它类似的故事，讲述着东部城市如何的落魄，
whether it's the separation of the railroad tracks in East Pittsburgh
无论是被铁路分开的东匹兹堡，
or the Grosse Pointe Gate in East Detroit or East St. Louis, East Oakland, East Philly.
被格罗斯波因特大门隔开的底特律，还是东圣路易斯，东奥克兰，费城的东部。
Why is it that communities on the social, economic and environmental margin tend to be on the east sides of places?
为什么一个城市的社会、经济和环境的边缘区，大多数都集中在东部呢？
Turns out, it's the wind.
事实证明，是因为风向。
If you look at the Earth from the North Pole, you'd see that it rotates counterclockwise.
如果你站在北极圈俯看地球，你会发现地球是逆时针旋转的。
The impact of this is that the winds in the northern and the southern hemispheres
结果是，北半球的风和南半球的风，
blow in the same direction as the rotation of the Earth -- to the east.
都吹向了同一个方向--东方。
A way to think about this is: imagine you're sitting around a campfire.
我们可以这样理解：想象我们坐在一堆篝火旁。
You've got to seat 10 people, you've got to keep everyone warm.
你要负责安排坐满十个人，还要保证每个人都能取到暖。
The question is: Who sits with the smoky wind blowing in their face?
但问题来了：谁坐在下风口被烟熏呢？
And the answer is: people with less power.
答案是，弱势群体的人。
This campfire dynamic is what's playing out in cities, not just in the US, but all around the world:
这个作用于我们城市的篝火动力原理，不仅发生在美国，全世界亦是如此。
East London; the east side of Paris is this way; East Jerusalem.
东伦敦；巴黎的东部也是这样，还有东耶路撒冷。
Even down the street from where we're sitting right now, the marginalized community is East Vancouver.
甚至沿着我们所在的这条街，温哥华的东部也是被边缘化的一侧。
I'm not the only one to notice this. I nerded on this hard, for years.
我并不是唯一注意到这一点的人。我苦思冥想了这个问题很多年。
And I finally found a group of economic historians in the UK who modeled industrial-era smokestack dispersion.
最终在英国找到了一群经济历史学家，他们规划了工业时代烟囱分布模式。
And they came to the same conclusion mathematically that I'd come to as an anthropologist, which is:
经过计算后得出的结论和我这个人类学家的如出一辙，也就是：
wind and pollution are driving marginalized communities to the east.
风向和污染是东部城市被边缘化的诱因。
The dominant logic of the industrial era is about disparity.
工业时代的主导逻辑就是划分贫富差距。
It's about haves and have-nots, and that's become part of our culture.
就是“无所不有”和“一无所有”，而那已经成为了我们文化的一部分。
That's why you know exactly what I'm talking about if I tell you someone's from the "wrong side of the tracks."
那就是为什么如果我告诉你某人来自“轨道错误的一侧”，你就懂我在说他家境贫寒。
That phrase comes from the direction that wind would blow dirty train smoke -- to the east, usually.
这个典故来源于，风把火车产生的又脏又黑的烟往东吹，通常情况下是这样。
I'm not saying every single community in the east is on the margin, or every community on the margin is in the east,
我的意思不是说每个东部的城市都处于边缘地带，或每个城市处在边缘地带的社区都位于城市的东部，
but I'm trying to make a bigger point about disparity by design.
但是我已经在尽我所能，通过（城市）设计来缩小东西部的差距。
So if you find yourself talking about any cardinal direction of a freeway,
如果你发现自己谈论的是高速公路，
a river, some train tracks, you're talking about an eastside community.
河流，火车轨道的基本方位，其实你讨论的就是城市的东部。
Now, the wind is obviously a natural phenomenon.
风是一个常见的自然现象。
But the human design decisions that we make to separate ourselves is not natural.
但是人类设计的决定，让我们把彼此隔开的这个决定，是人为的。
Consider the fact that every eastside community in the United States was built during the era of legal segregation.
考虑到在美国，每一个城市的东部，都是建于种族隔离合法的年代。

We clearly weren't even trying to design for the benefit of everyone, so we ended up dealing with issues like redlining.
很显然我们在设计城市时，甚至都没有为每个人的利益考虑，于是我们最后就萌生了诸如贷款歧视一类的问题。
This is where the government literally created maps to tell bankers where they shouldn't lend.
这是当时的政府设计的城市地图，告诉银行哪些地方不该放贷。
These are some of those actual maps. And you'll notice how the red tends to be clustered on the east sides of these cities.
这只是众多地图中的冰山一角。你们可能会注意到，红色部分大都聚集在这些城市的东侧。
Those financial design decisions became a self-fulfilling prophecy:
那些在财政政策设计中所做出的决定，都成为了自我应验的预言：
no loans turned into low property tax base and that bled into worse schools
没有贷款，财产税的税收基数就小，政府对学校建设投入就会减少，
and a less well-prepared workforce, and -- lo and behold -- lower incomes.
因此培养出来的劳动力也更不具备竞争力，所以--瞧--又导致了更低的收入。
It means that you can't qualify for a loan.
低收入就意味着你没有资格申请贷款。
Just a vicious downward spiral. And that's just the case with lending.
这就是一个螺旋下降的恶性循环。而那只是关于借贷的一个例子而已。
We've made similarly sinister design decisions on any number of issues,
我们在许许多多问题上也曾做过类似的恶名昭著的决定，
from water infrastructure to where we decide to place grocery stores versus liquor stores,
从水利基础建设，到决定要在哪里开杂货店或烟酒行，
or even for whom and how we design and fund technology products.
甚至连我们为了谁，以及如何设计和资助技术产品都是如此。
Collectively, this list of harms is the artifact of our more primitive selves.
综上所述，这一系列的问题，都是我们的原始罪恶一手造成的。
I don't think this is how we'd want to be remembered,
我想，这并不是我们想要被世人记住的方式，
but this is basically what we've been doing to eastside communities for the last century.
但这基本就是我们上个世纪针对东部城市建设的所作所为。
The good news is, it doesn't have to be this way.
但好在，事情还有回旋的余地，
We got ourselves into this eastside dilemma through bad design, and so we can get out of it with good design.
如果我们陷入这个东部发展两难的局面是因为一个糟糕的决定，那么我们就可以通过一个合理的设计，摆脱这一局面。
And I believe the first principle of good design is actually really simple:
而且我相信，一个好的设计，其首要原则其实非常简单：
we have to start with the commitment to design for the benefit of everyone.
我们要从承诺为每个人的利益考虑做起。
So, remember the campfire metaphor.
大家还记得那个篝火比喻吗？
If we want to benefit everyone, maybe we just sit in a horseshoe, so nobody gets the smoke in their face.
如果我们想惠及每一个人的话，只要设计成马蹄形就好了，这样就没有人会被烟熏到。
I've got to make a note to the gentrifiers,
我要给乡绅们提一提这个建议，
because the point of this image is not to say you get to roll into eastside communities
因为这幅图的意义，不是说你们现在要去城市的东边，
and just move people out of the way, because you don't.
然后粗暴的将大家赶到别的地方去，因为你不能这么做。
But the point is, if you start with this first principle of benefiting everyone,
但关键在于，如果你把所有人的利益当作处理一切事物的第一原则，
then elegant solutions may become more obvious than you assume.
那么这些问题就会比你想象的更容易去解决。
What are the elegant solutions to close this gap between Palo Alto and East Palo Alto in Silicon Valley?
那么有什么办法能够合理的减小硅谷东西帕罗奥图之间的（贫富）差距呢？
I've got to like the odds of starting with EPA.
我想可以先从东帕罗奥图开始，迎难而上。
It's in the middle of Silicon Valley, the epicenter of innovation and wealth creation.
它位于硅谷的中部，是创新和财富的重中之重。
If we can solve this problem anywhere, it ought to be here.
如果说要在哪个地方解决问题，那么这里绝对是不二之选。
And if we can solve the problems for EPA, we could apply those solutions to other eastside communities.
如果我们连东帕罗奥图的问题都解决了，那么其它东部城市，都可以参照这个方法。
If you think about it, it's actually a massive investment opportunity and an opportunity to drive policy change and philanthropy.
如果你仔细考虑，这其实是个巨大的投资机会，还能促进政策改革和慈善事业。
But at the core, it's this fundamental design principle, this choice of whether we're going to decide to take care of everyone.
但其核心就在于这个设计的根本原则，我们是否决定照顾到每一个人。
And it's a choice we can make, loved ones. We've got the capital.
这是我们能够做出的爱心决定。我们有了资金。
We've got technology on our side, and it keeps getting better.
我们还有支持我们的技术，而且这些技术日新月异。
We've got some of the best entrepreneurs in the world in this building and in these communities right now.
在这栋大楼里，在这些城市里，我们能找到世界上最优秀的企业家。
But the fundamental question is: What are we designing for?
但根本问题是：我们是为谁设计？
More haves and have-nots? More disparity? Or parity, the choice to come together.
是那“无所不有”还是“一无所有”的一边？是继续扩大还是减小这个差距？是时候让大家齐心协力了。
Because the reality is, this is not the industrial era.
因为现实是，工业时代已经一去不复返。
We don't live in the era of legal segregation.
我们再也不是生活在种族隔离合法的年代了。
So the punchline is, there is no wrong side of the tracks.
总而言之，轨道两边不应该有贫富之分。
And all I'm saying is, we should design our economy and our communities with that in mind. Thank you.
我想说的只是，我们在制定经济政策和设计城市时，都要时刻铭记那个原则。谢谢。