sentence-transformers/parallel-sentences-talks

english stringlengths 2 3.06k	non_english stringlengths 1 4.3k
And here comes the natural enemy, minute pirate bug -- "minute," because it is rather small.	接下來，天敵登場了，微小的掠食蟲，說微小是因為它真的很小。
Here you can see the adult, black, and two young ones.	你可以看見那隻黑色的成蟲，還有兩隻幼蟲。
And again, in action.	接下來又到了行動時間。
This adult pierces the thrips, sucking it within just several minutes, going to the other prey, continuing all over the place.	成蟲刺穿了牧草蟲，只花了幾分鐘的時間去吸食，然後就換另一個目標下手，在這裡持續進行著。
And if we spread those minute pirate bugs, the good ones, for example, in a sweet pepper plot, they go to the flowers.	如果我們散佈這種微小的掠食蟲，那種益蟲，例如在種植甜椒的菜園裡，它們會躲藏在花朵中。
And look -- this flower is flooded with predatory bugs, with the good ones, after wiping out the bad ones, the thrips.	看這裡，當那些掠食性的蟲，那些益蟲將那些害蟲，牧草蟲都清理乾淨後，花朵裏擠滿了這些益蟲。
So this is a very positive situation.	所以這是相當正面的情況。
No harm to the developing fruit. No harm to the fruit set.	對成長中的果實不會有害處，對成熟的果實也沒有害處。
Everything is just fine under these circumstances.	在這種情況下，一切都很美好。
But again, the question is, here you saw them on a one-to-one basis -- the pest, the natural enemy.	不過問題是，你可以發現這是一種一物剋一物的現象 -- 害蟲和它的天敵。
What we do is actually this.	而我們正在做這件事。
In Northeast Israel, in Kibbutz Sde Eliyahu, there is a facility that mass-produces those natural enemies.	在以色列的東北方，在 Sde Eliyahu 的集體農場裡，有一個機構正在量產那些天敵。
In other words, what we do there is amplify the natural control, or the biological control phenomenon.	換句話說，我們在那兒所做的，就是去放大，我們去放大自然抑制的效果，或該說是生物抑制的機制。
And in 30,000 square meters of state-of-the-art greenhouses, there, we are mass-producing those predatory mites, those minute pirate bugs, those parasitic wasps, etc.	在三萬五千平方尺的新型溫室之中，我們正在量產那些掠食性的蟎，那些微小的掠食性的蟲，那些寄生的胡蜂 ... 等等。
Many different parts.	分成許多不同的區域。
By the way, they have a very nice landscape -- you see the Jordanian Mountains on the one hand, and the Jordan Valley on the other hand, and a good, mild winter and a nice, hot summer, which is an excellent condition to mass-produce those creatures.	對了，那兒有很棒的風景。一邊有約旦山脈，另一邊有約旦溪谷，還有很棒，很溫和的冬天，以及很讚，很熱的夏天，對於量產這些生物來說，這些是極佳的條件。
And by the way, mass-production -- it is not genetic manipulation.	對了，這邊說的量產，並不是基因改造工程。
There are no GMOs -- genetically modified organisms -- whatsoever.	沒有GMO， genetically modified organisms ( 生物基因改造 )這種事。
We take them from nature, and the only thing that we do is give them the optimal conditions, under the greenhouses or in the climate rooms, in order to proliferate, multiply and reproduce.	我們從自然界把益蟲找來，我們只做一件事，我們提供最佳的條件，在溫室之中，或是在恆溫室裡，使得這些益蟲能夠快速地大量繁殖。
And that's what we get.	事實上，這也正是我們所得到的結果。
You see under a microscope.	從顯微靜下你可以看見，
You see in the upper left corner? You see a single predatory mite.	在左上角有單隻的掠食性蟎。
And this is the whole bunch of predatory mites.	這是一堆我們在量產的那種掠食性蟎。
You see this ampul. You see this one.	看看這個小瓶子。
I have one gram of those predatory mites.	這兒有一公克的掠食性蟎。
One gram is 80,000 individuals.	一公克裡有八萬隻，
80,000 individuals are good enough to control one acre, 4,000 square meters, of a strawberry plot against spider mites for the whole season of almost one year.	八萬隻蟎已經足以在一英畝，也就是四千平方尺的草莓田中，在一整年的採收季節裡，去解決那些蜘蛛蟎。
And we can produce from this, believe you me, several dozens of kilograms on an annual basis.	而藉由這個，我們每年可以生產出幾十公斤的數量。
So this is what I call amplification of the phenomenon.	這就是我說的去放大這種自然機制。
And no, we do not disrupt the balance.	我們並不是在破壞生態平衡。
On the contrary, because we bring it to every cultural plot where the balance was already disrupted by the chemicals.	相反的，我們將這些益蟲導入到那些已經被化學藥劑破壞生態平衡的農田，
Here we come with those natural enemies in order to reverse a little bit of the wheel and to bring more natural balance to the agricultural plot by reducing those chemicals.	我們使用了這些天敵，以期能夠將情況反轉過來，藉由降低化學藥劑的使用，讓農田能夠達到更高的自然平衡。這就是我們的概念。
And what is the impact?	然而，成效如何呢？
In this table, you can actually see what is an impact of a successful biological control by good bugs.	藉由這個表，你可以確切的看見，藉由使用益蟲成功進行生物抑制所獲得的成效。
For example, in Israel, where we employ more than 1,000 hectares -- 10,000 dunams in Israeli terms -- of biological pests controlling sweet pepper under protection, 75 percent of the pesticides were actually reduced.	例如，在以色列，我們在那兒進行生物抑制害蟲，來保護甜椒園，已經超過了一千公頃 -- 用以色列的單位是一萬杜納畝，已經確實讓農藥的使用量減少了75%。
And Israeli strawberries, even more -- 80 percent of the pesticides, especially those aimed against pest mites in strawberries.	而以色列的草莓園所使用的農藥 -- 則甚至減少了80%，尤其是那些針對草莓上有害的蟎的農藥。
So the impact is very strong.	所以效果是相當可觀的。
And there goes the question, especially if you ask growers, agriculturists: Why biological control?	接下來的一些問題，尤其是當你問那些耕種者，農民們：為什麼會選擇生物抑制法?
Why good bugs?	為什麼選擇益蟲?
By the way, the number of answers you get equals the number of people you ask.	不過，不管你問了幾個人，每個人都會給你不一樣的答案。
But if we go, for example, to this place, Southeast Israel, the Arava area above the Great Rift Valley, where the pearl of Israeli agriculture is located, especially under greenhouse conditions, or under screenhouse conditions -- if you drive all the way to Eilat, you see this just in the middle of the desert.	比方說這個地方，以色列的東南方，大裂谷上面一點的阿拉瓦區域，那兒有著 -- 以色列最頂尖的農業之寶，尤其是在溫室條件之下，在透明的房間中 -- 如果你開車到 Eilat 的話，你會發現它位在沙漠的中央。
And if you zoom in, you can definitely watch this: grandparents with their grandchildren, distributing the natural enemies, the good bugs, instead of wearing special clothes and gas masks and applying chemicals.	如果你仔細去看，你一定可以看見，爺爺奶奶帶著孫子們，正在散佈這些天敵，那些益蟲，而不是穿戴著特殊衣物和防毒面具，去噴灑著化學藥劑。
So safety, with respect to the application, is the number one answer that we get from growers, for "Why biological control?"	這種技術的使用是相當安全的，這是我們詢問耕種者們為什麼要用生物抑制法所獲得答案中的第一名。
Number two, many growers are, in fact, petrified by the idea of resistance, that the pests will become resistant to the chemicals, just like in our case, that bacteria becomes resistant to antibiotics.	而第二名的答案，許多耕種者會擔心抗藥性的問題，擔心這些害蟲會逐漸對農藥產生抵抗力，就像是白喉的病菌對抗生素產生了抗體。
It's the same, and it can happen very quickly.	同樣的，這可能很快就會發生了。
Fortunately, in either biological control or even natural control, resistance is extremely rare.	所幸，不論是生物抑制法，或是自然抑制法，都很難會遇到抵抗的力量。
It hardly happens.	這幾乎不可能發生。
Because this is evolution, this is the natural ratio, unlike resistance, which happens in the case of chemicals.	因為這是一種物種演化，這是一種自然的機率，不像是生物本身會對藥劑產生抵抗力。
And thirdly, public demand.	第三名的答案是，公眾的需求。
The more the public demands the reduction of chemicals, the more growers become aware of the fact that they should, wherever they can and wherever possible, replace the chemical control with biological control.	大眾逐漸傾向於去支持降低化學藥劑的使用量，越來越多的耕種者發現到他們應該竭盡所能，改以生物抑制法來取代化學藥劑抑制法。
Even here, there is another grower, you see, very interested in the bugs, the bad ones and the good ones, wearing this magnifier already on her head, just walking safely in her crop.	甚至像是這個，有另一名耕種者，她對這些小蟲很有興趣，不論是害蟲或是益蟲，手上拿著一個放大鏡，在農作物裡面安全地穿梭著。
Finally, I want to get to my vision, or, in fact, to my dream.	最後，我想談談我的看法，或該說，是我的夢想。
Because, you see, this is the reality.	因為你知道嗎，這就是現實狀況。
Have a look at the gap.	看看這個落差。
If we take the overall turnover of the biocontrol industry worldwide, it's 250 million dollars.	如果我們計算全世界生物抑制法的花費，大約是二億五千萬美金。
And look at the overall pesticide industry in all the crops throughout the world.	看看全世界在農作物上使用的農藥花費。
I think it's times 100 or something like that.	我想大概會是一百倍左右吧。
Twenty-five billion.	大約二百五十億美金。
So there is a huge gap to bridge.	所以這有著很大的落差需要去填補。
So actually, how can we do it?	所以事實上，我們該怎麼做？
How can we bridge, or let's say, narrow, this gap over the years?	我們要怎麼去填補，或者說讓這個落差
First of all, we need to find more robust, good and reliable biological solutions, more good bugs that we can either mass-produce or actually conserve in the field.	在每一年的生產中逐漸減小？首先，我們需要更多健康的，有益的，可以性賴的生物方案，更多的益蟲，不論是大量繁殖，或是在田野中保持它的數量。
Secondly, to create even more intensive and strict public demand for the reduction of chemicals in agricultural fresh produce.	第二點，促使大衆做出更強烈和更嚴格的要求，來減少種植新鮮農產品時所使用的化學藥劑。
And thirdly, also to increase awareness by the growers to the potential of this industry.	第三點，加強耕種者對於對於這種產業潛力的了解。
And this gap really narrows.	如此，這個落差就會變小。
Step by step, it does narrow.	逐漸地，就會縮小。
So I think my last slide is: All we are saying -- we can actually sing it -- Give nature a chance.	所以我最後一張投影片是：我們所說的這些，都是可以作到的，請給大自然一個機會。
I'm saying it on behalf of all the biocontrol practitioners and implementers, in Israel and abroad, really give nature a chance.	我謹代表自然抑制法的提倡者，以及執行者，不論是在以色列還是其他國家，在此呼籲：請給大自然一個機會吧。
(Music by Anna Oxygen) (Music: "Shells" by Mirah) ♪ You learned how to be a diver ♪ ♪ Put on a mask and believe ♪ ♪ Gather a dinner of shells for me ♪ ♪ Take the tank down so you can breathe ♪ ♪ Below ♪ ♪ Movements slow ♪ ♪ You are an island ♪ ♪ All the secrets until then ♪ ♪ Pried open I held them ♪ ♪ Until they were still ♪ ♪ Until they were still ♪ ♪ Until they were still ♪ (Music) (Music by Caroline Lufkin) (Music by Anna Oxygen) ♪ Dream time, I will find you ♪ ♪ You are shady, you are new ♪ ♪ I'm not so good at mornings ♪ ♪ I can see too clearly ♪ ♪ I prefer the nighttime ♪ ♪ Dark and blurry ♪ ♪ Falling night ♪ ♪ Hovering light ♪ ♪ Calling night ♪ ♪ Hovering light ♪ ♪ In the moontime I will give up my life ♪ ♪ And in the deep dreams ♪ ♪ You will find me ♪ (Applause) [Excerpts from "Myth and Infrastructure"] Bruno Giussani: Come back.	(安娜．奧克斯珍的創作曲) (米拉的創作曲 : 貝殼 Shells) ♪你學會如何成為一個潛水員♪ ♪穿上氧氣罩和信心♪ ♪為我採集一頓貝殼晚餐♪ ♪帶著氧氣筒吧，如此你才能呼吸♪ ♪在深海裡♪ ♪緩慢地遊走♪ ♪你成為了孤島♪ ♪所有的秘密在那時啊♪ ♪都將被撬開，但我會守護它們♪ ♪直到一切靜止♪ ♪直到一切靜止♪ ♪直到一切靜止♪ (背景音樂) (卡洛琳、魯芙金的創作曲) (安娜．奧克斯珍的創作曲) ♪在睡夢中，我會遇見你♪ ♪你是如此的曖昧不明，你是如此的嶄新♪ ♪夢醒時分後不是我的優勢♪ ♪因為我看得太清楚♪ ♪我偏好夜晚時刻♪ ♪深沉又朦朧♪ ♪夜幕低垂♪ ♪光暈環繞♪ ♪呼喚夜晚♪ ♪光暈環繞♪ ♪月娘高掛時，我會放棄我的生命♪ ♪在沉眠之中♪ ♪你會遇見我♪ (掌聲) [表演選自 "神話和基礎建設"] 布魯諾吉桑尼 : 請過來
Miwa Matreyek!	米娃馬崔耶克 !
Automation anxiety has been spreading lately, a fear that in the future, many jobs will be performed by machines rather than human beings, given the remarkable advances that are unfolding in artificial intelligence and robotics.	近期，自動化焦慮一直在散佈，它是種恐懼，害怕在未來許多工作會由機器來進行，而不是人類，因為現在已可以看到在人工智慧和機器人學領域的驚人進步。
What's clear is that there will be significant change.	很清楚的一點是，將來會有顯著的改變。
What's less clear is what that change will look like.	比較不那麼清楚的是，改變會是什麼樣的。
My research suggests that the future is both troubling and exciting.	我的研究指出，未來既讓人困擾又讓人興奮。
The threat of technological unemployment is real, and yet it's a good problem to have.	科技造成失業的威脅是真的，但，能有這種問題也是件好事。
And to explain how I came to that conclusion, I want to confront three myths that I think are currently obscuring our vision of this automated future.	為了解釋我如何得到這個結論，我想要來正視三項迷思，我認為這些迷思目前遮掩了我們的視線，讓我們看不清自動化的未來。
A picture that we see on our television screens, in books, in films, in everyday commentary is one where an army of robots descends on the workplace with one goal in mind: to displace human beings from their work.	我們在電視上、書中、電影中、每天的評論中所看到的描繪，通常是機器人大軍湧入工作場所，心中只有一個目標：在工作上取代人類。
And I call this the Terminator myth.	我稱這個想法為「終結者迷思」。
Yes, machines displace human beings from particular tasks, but they don't just substitute for human beings.	是的，在特定的工作任務上，機器會取代人類，但它們不會就這樣代替人類。
They also complement them in other tasks, making that work more valuable and more important.	它們在其他工作任務上會補足人類，讓工作更有價值、更重要。
Sometimes they complement human beings directly, making them more productive or more efficient at a particular task.	有時，它們會直接補足人類，讓人類在特定的工作任務上能更有生產力或更有效率。
So a taxi driver can use a satnav system to navigate on unfamiliar roads.	計程車司機在不熟悉的路上可以用衛星導航系統來協助導航。
An architect can use computer-assisted design software to design bigger, more complicated buildings.	建築師可以用電腦輔助的設計軟體來設計更大、更複雜的建築物。
But technological progress doesn't just complement human beings directly.	但科技進步並不只會直接補足人類。
It also complements them indirectly, and it does this in two ways.	它也會用間接方式補足人類，間接的方式有兩種。
The first is if we think of the economy as a pie, technological progress makes the pie bigger.	第一，如果我們把經濟想成是一塊派，科技進步會讓派變更大。
As productivity increases, incomes rise and demand grows.	隨著生產力增加，收入會增加，需求會成長。
The British pie, for instance, is more than a hundred times the size it was 300 years ago.	比如，英國的派與三百年前相比，現在超過百倍大。
And so people displaced from tasks in the old pie could find tasks to do in the new pie instead.	在舊派工作被取代的人，能在新派中找到工作。
But technological progress doesn't just make the pie bigger.	但科技進步並不只會讓派變大。
It also changes the ingredients in the pie.	它也會改變派的成分原料。
As time passes, people spend their income in different ways, changing how they spread it across existing goods, and developing tastes for entirely new goods, too.	隨時間演進，人會以不同的方式花費他們的收入，改變既有商品花費上的分配，並也會發展出對於全新商品的品味。
New industries are created, new tasks have to be done and that means often new roles have to be filled.	新的產業會被創造出來，有新的工作任務需要被完成，那就意味著有新角色要有人扮演。
So again, the British pie: 300 years ago, most people worked on farms, 150 years ago, in factories, and today, most people work in offices.	所以，再回到英國的派：三百年前，大部分的人在農場工作，一百五十年前，在工廠工作，現今，大部分的人在辦公室工作。
And once again, people displaced from tasks in the old bit of pie could tumble into tasks in the new bit of pie instead.	再提一次，在老派工作被取代的人，可能會在新派當中發現可以做的工作任務。
Economists call these effects complementarities, but really that's just a fancy word to capture the different way that technological progress helps human beings.	經濟學家把這些效應稱為互補性，但那只是個很炫的詞，其實意思就是科技進步用不同的方式在協助人類。
Resolving this Terminator myth shows us that there are two forces at play: one, machine substitution that harms workers, but also these complementarities that do the opposite.	解開這個終結者迷思之後，會發現有兩股力量在運作：第一：機器代替，這會傷害到工人，但也會有第二股力量，互補性，反而會幫助工人。
Now the second myth, what I call the intelligence myth.	再來，第二項迷思，我稱之為「智慧迷思」。
What do the tasks of driving a car, making a medical diagnosis and identifying a bird at a fleeting glimpse have in common?	以下這些工作任務：駕駛一台車、做出醫療診斷，及快速一瞥就辨識出一隻鳥，有何共通性？
Well, these are all tasks that until very recently, leading economists thought couldn't readily be automated.	這些工作任務都是直到最近仍被經濟學家認為不能自動化的工作任務。

And here comes the natural enemy, minute pirate bug -- "minute," because it is rather small.

接下來，天敵登場了，微小的掠食蟲，說微小是因為它真的很小。

Here you can see the adult, black, and two young ones.

你可以看見那隻黑色的成蟲，還有兩隻幼蟲。

And again, in action.

接下來又到了行動時間。

This adult pierces the thrips, sucking it within just several minutes, going to the other prey, continuing all over the place.

成蟲刺穿了牧草蟲，只花了幾分鐘的時間去吸食，然後就換另一個目標下手，在這裡持續進行著。

And if we spread those minute pirate bugs, the good ones, for example, in a sweet pepper plot, they go to the flowers.

如果我們散佈這種微小的掠食蟲，那種益蟲，例如在種植甜椒的菜園裡，它們會躲藏在花朵中。

And look -- this flower is flooded with predatory bugs, with the good ones, after wiping out the bad ones, the thrips.

看這裡，當那些掠食性的蟲，那些益蟲將那些害蟲，牧草蟲都清理乾淨後，花朵裏擠滿了這些益蟲。

So this is a very positive situation.

所以這是相當正面的情況。

No harm to the developing fruit. No harm to the fruit set.

對成長中的果實不會有害處，對成熟的果實也沒有害處。

Everything is just fine under these circumstances.

在這種情況下，一切都很美好。

But again, the question is, here you saw them on a one-to-one basis -- the pest, the natural enemy.

不過問題是，你可以發現這是一種一物剋一物的現象 -- 害蟲和它的天敵。

What we do is actually this.

而我們正在做這件事。

In Northeast Israel, in Kibbutz Sde Eliyahu, there is a facility that mass-produces those natural enemies.

在以色列的東北方，在 Sde Eliyahu 的集體農場裡，有一個機構正在量產那些天敵。

In other words, what we do there is amplify the natural control, or the biological control phenomenon.

換句話說，我們在那兒所做的，就是去放大，我們去放大自然抑制的效果，或該說是生物抑制的機制。

And in 30,000 square meters of state-of-the-art greenhouses, there, we are mass-producing those predatory mites, those minute pirate bugs, those parasitic wasps, etc.

在三萬五千平方尺的新型溫室之中，我們正在量產那些掠食性的蟎，那些微小的掠食性的蟲，那些寄生的胡蜂 ... 等等。

Many different parts.

分成許多不同的區域。

By the way, they have a very nice landscape -- you see the Jordanian Mountains on the one hand, and the Jordan Valley on the other hand, and a good, mild winter and a nice, hot summer, which is an excellent condition to mass-produce those creatures.

對了，那兒有很棒的風景。一邊有約旦山脈，另一邊有約旦溪谷，還有很棒，很溫和的冬天，以及很讚，很熱的夏天，對於量產這些生物來說，這些是極佳的條件。

And by the way, mass-production -- it is not genetic manipulation.

對了，這邊說的量產，並不是基因改造工程。

There are no GMOs -- genetically modified organisms -- whatsoever.

沒有GMO， genetically modified organisms ( 生物基因改造 )這種事。

We take them from nature, and the only thing that we do is give them the optimal conditions, under the greenhouses or in the climate rooms, in order to proliferate, multiply and reproduce.

我們從自然界把益蟲找來，我們只做一件事，我們提供最佳的條件，在溫室之中，或是在恆溫室裡，使得這些益蟲能夠快速地大量繁殖。

And that's what we get.

事實上，這也正是我們所得到的結果。

You see under a microscope.

從顯微靜下你可以看見，

You see in the upper left corner? You see a single predatory mite.

在左上角有單隻的掠食性蟎。

And this is the whole bunch of predatory mites.

這是一堆我們在量產的那種掠食性蟎。

You see this ampul. You see this one.

看看這個小瓶子。

I have one gram of those predatory mites.

這兒有一公克的掠食性蟎。

One gram is 80,000 individuals.

一公克裡有八萬隻，

80,000 individuals are good enough to control one acre, 4,000 square meters, of a strawberry plot against spider mites for the whole season of almost one year.

八萬隻蟎已經足以在一英畝，也就是四千平方尺的草莓田中，在一整年的採收季節裡，去解決那些蜘蛛蟎。

And we can produce from this, believe you me, several dozens of kilograms on an annual basis.

而藉由這個，我們每年可以生產出幾十公斤的數量。

So this is what I call amplification of the phenomenon.

這就是我說的去放大這種自然機制。

And no, we do not disrupt the balance.

我們並不是在破壞生態平衡。

On the contrary, because we bring it to every cultural plot where the balance was already disrupted by the chemicals.

相反的，我們將這些益蟲導入到那些已經被化學藥劑破壞生態平衡的農田，

Here we come with those natural enemies in order to reverse a little bit of the wheel and to bring more natural balance to the agricultural plot by reducing those chemicals.

我們使用了這些天敵，以期能夠將情況反轉過來，藉由降低化學藥劑的使用，讓農田能夠達到更高的自然平衡。這就是我們的概念。

And what is the impact?

然而，成效如何呢？

In this table, you can actually see what is an impact of a successful biological control by good bugs.

藉由這個表，你可以確切的看見，藉由使用益蟲成功進行生物抑制所獲得的成效。

For example, in Israel, where we employ more than 1,000 hectares -- 10,000 dunams in Israeli terms -- of biological pests controlling sweet pepper under protection, 75 percent of the pesticides were actually reduced.

例如，在以色列，我們在那兒進行生物抑制害蟲，來保護甜椒園，已經超過了一千公頃 -- 用以色列的單位是一萬杜納畝，已經確實讓農藥的使用量減少了75%。

And Israeli strawberries, even more -- 80 percent of the pesticides, especially those aimed against pest mites in strawberries.

而以色列的草莓園所使用的農藥 -- 則甚至減少了80%，尤其是那些針對草莓上有害的蟎的農藥。

So the impact is very strong.

所以效果是相當可觀的。

And there goes the question, especially if you ask growers, agriculturists: Why biological control?

接下來的一些問題，尤其是當你問那些耕種者，農民們：為什麼會選擇生物抑制法?

Why good bugs?

為什麼選擇益蟲?

By the way, the number of answers you get equals the number of people you ask.

不過，不管你問了幾個人，每個人都會給你不一樣的答案。

But if we go, for example, to this place, Southeast Israel, the Arava area above the Great Rift Valley, where the pearl of Israeli agriculture is located, especially under greenhouse conditions, or under screenhouse conditions -- if you drive all the way to Eilat, you see this just in the middle of the desert.

比方說這個地方，以色列的東南方，大裂谷上面一點的阿拉瓦區域，那兒有著 -- 以色列最頂尖的農業之寶，尤其是在溫室條件之下，在透明的房間中 -- 如果你開車到 Eilat 的話，你會發現它位在沙漠的中央。

And if you zoom in, you can definitely watch this: grandparents with their grandchildren, distributing the natural enemies, the good bugs, instead of wearing special clothes and gas masks and applying chemicals.

如果你仔細去看，你一定可以看見，爺爺奶奶帶著孫子們，正在散佈這些天敵，那些益蟲，而不是穿戴著特殊衣物和防毒面具，去噴灑著化學藥劑。

So safety, with respect to the application, is the number one answer that we get from growers, for "Why biological control?"

這種技術的使用是相當安全的，這是我們詢問耕種者們為什麼要用生物抑制法所獲得答案中的第一名。

Number two, many growers are, in fact, petrified by the idea of resistance, that the pests will become resistant to the chemicals, just like in our case, that bacteria becomes resistant to antibiotics.

而第二名的答案，許多耕種者會擔心抗藥性的問題，擔心這些害蟲會逐漸對農藥產生抵抗力，就像是白喉的病菌對抗生素產生了抗體。

It's the same, and it can happen very quickly.

同樣的，這可能很快就會發生了。

Fortunately, in either biological control or even natural control, resistance is extremely rare.

所幸，不論是生物抑制法，或是自然抑制法，都很難會遇到抵抗的力量。

It hardly happens.

這幾乎不可能發生。

Because this is evolution, this is the natural ratio, unlike resistance, which happens in the case of chemicals.

因為這是一種物種演化，這是一種自然的機率，不像是生物本身會對藥劑產生抵抗力。

And thirdly, public demand.

第三名的答案是，公眾的需求。

The more the public demands the reduction of chemicals, the more growers become aware of the fact that they should, wherever they can and wherever possible, replace the chemical control with biological control.

大眾逐漸傾向於去支持降低化學藥劑的使用量，越來越多的耕種者發現到他們應該竭盡所能，改以生物抑制法來取代化學藥劑抑制法。

Even here, there is another grower, you see, very interested in the bugs, the bad ones and the good ones, wearing this magnifier already on her head, just walking safely in her crop.

甚至像是這個，有另一名耕種者，她對這些小蟲很有興趣，不論是害蟲或是益蟲，手上拿著一個放大鏡，在農作物裡面安全地穿梭著。

Finally, I want to get to my vision, or, in fact, to my dream.

最後，我想談談我的看法，或該說，是我的夢想。

Because, you see, this is the reality.

因為你知道嗎，這就是現實狀況。

Have a look at the gap.

看看這個落差。

If we take the overall turnover of the biocontrol industry worldwide, it's 250 million dollars.

如果我們計算全世界生物抑制法的花費，大約是二億五千萬美金。

And look at the overall pesticide industry in all the crops throughout the world.

看看全世界在農作物上使用的農藥花費。

I think it's times 100 or something like that.

我想大概會是一百倍左右吧。

Twenty-five billion.

大約二百五十億美金。

So there is a huge gap to bridge.

所以這有著很大的落差需要去填補。

So actually, how can we do it?

所以事實上，我們該怎麼做？

How can we bridge, or let's say, narrow, this gap over the years?

我們要怎麼去填補，或者說讓這個落差

First of all, we need to find more robust, good and reliable biological solutions, more good bugs that we can either mass-produce or actually conserve in the field.

在每一年的生產中逐漸減小？首先，我們需要更多健康的，有益的，可以性賴的生物方案，更多的益蟲，不論是大量繁殖，或是在田野中保持它的數量。

Secondly, to create even more intensive and strict public demand for the reduction of chemicals in agricultural fresh produce.

第二點，促使大衆做出更強烈和更嚴格的要求，來減少種植新鮮農產品時所使用的化學藥劑。

And thirdly, also to increase awareness by the growers to the potential of this industry.

第三點，加強耕種者對於對於這種產業潛力的了解。

And this gap really narrows.

如此，這個落差就會變小。

Step by step, it does narrow.

逐漸地，就會縮小。

So I think my last slide is: All we are saying -- we can actually sing it -- Give nature a chance.

所以我最後一張投影片是：我們所說的這些，都是可以作到的，請給大自然一個機會。

I'm saying it on behalf of all the biocontrol practitioners and implementers, in Israel and abroad, really give nature a chance.

我謹代表自然抑制法的提倡者，以及執行者，不論是在以色列還是其他國家，在此呼籲：請給大自然一個機會吧。

(Music by Anna Oxygen) (Music: "Shells" by Mirah) ♪ You learned how to be a diver ♪ ♪ Put on a mask and believe ♪ ♪ Gather a dinner of shells for me ♪ ♪ Take the tank down so you can breathe ♪ ♪ Below ♪ ♪ Movements slow ♪ ♪ You are an island ♪ ♪ All the secrets until then ♪ ♪ Pried open I held them ♪ ♪ Until they were still ♪ ♪ Until they were still ♪ ♪ Until they were still ♪ (Music) (Music by Caroline Lufkin) (Music by Anna Oxygen) ♪ Dream time, I will find you ♪ ♪ You are shady, you are new ♪ ♪ I'm not so good at mornings ♪ ♪ I can see too clearly ♪ ♪ I prefer the nighttime ♪ ♪ Dark and blurry ♪ ♪ Falling night ♪ ♪ Hovering light ♪ ♪ Calling night ♪ ♪ Hovering light ♪ ♪ In the moontime I will give up my life ♪ ♪ And in the deep dreams ♪ ♪ You will find me ♪ (Applause) [Excerpts from "Myth and Infrastructure"] Bruno Giussani: Come back.

(安娜．奧克斯珍的創作曲) (米拉的創作曲 : 貝殼 Shells) ♪你學會如何成為一個潛水員♪ ♪穿上氧氣罩和信心♪ ♪為我採集一頓貝殼晚餐♪ ♪帶著氧氣筒吧，如此你才能呼吸♪ ♪在深海裡♪ ♪緩慢地遊走♪ ♪你成為了孤島♪ ♪所有的秘密在那時啊♪ ♪都將被撬開，但我會守護它們♪ ♪直到一切靜止♪ ♪直到一切靜止♪ ♪直到一切靜止♪ (背景音樂) (卡洛琳、魯芙金的創作曲) (安娜．奧克斯珍的創作曲) ♪在睡夢中，我會遇見你♪ ♪你是如此的曖昧不明，你是如此的嶄新♪ ♪夢醒時分後不是我的優勢♪ ♪因為我看得太清楚♪ ♪我偏好夜晚時刻♪ ♪深沉又朦朧♪ ♪夜幕低垂♪ ♪光暈環繞♪ ♪呼喚夜晚♪ ♪光暈環繞♪ ♪月娘高掛時，我會放棄我的生命♪ ♪在沉眠之中♪ ♪你會遇見我♪ (掌聲) [表演選自 "神話和基礎建設"] 布魯諾吉桑尼 : 請過來

Miwa Matreyek!

米娃馬崔耶克 !

Automation anxiety has been spreading lately, a fear that in the future, many jobs will be performed by machines rather than human beings, given the remarkable advances that are unfolding in artificial intelligence and robotics.

近期，自動化焦慮一直在散佈，它是種恐懼，害怕在未來許多工作會由機器來進行，而不是人類，因為現在已可以看到在人工智慧和機器人學領域的驚人進步。

What's clear is that there will be significant change.

很清楚的一點是，將來會有顯著的改變。

What's less clear is what that change will look like.

比較不那麼清楚的是，改變會是什麼樣的。

My research suggests that the future is both troubling and exciting.

我的研究指出，未來既讓人困擾又讓人興奮。

The threat of technological unemployment is real, and yet it's a good problem to have.

科技造成失業的威脅是真的，但，能有這種問題也是件好事。

And to explain how I came to that conclusion, I want to confront three myths that I think are currently obscuring our vision of this automated future.

為了解釋我如何得到這個結論，我想要來正視三項迷思，我認為這些迷思目前遮掩了我們的視線，讓我們看不清自動化的未來。

A picture that we see on our television screens, in books, in films, in everyday commentary is one where an army of robots descends on the workplace with one goal in mind: to displace human beings from their work.

我們在電視上、書中、電影中、每天的評論中所看到的描繪，通常是機器人大軍湧入工作場所，心中只有一個目標：在工作上取代人類。

And I call this the Terminator myth.

我稱這個想法為「終結者迷思」。

Yes, machines displace human beings from particular tasks, but they don't just substitute for human beings.

是的，在特定的工作任務上，機器會取代人類，但它們不會就這樣代替人類。

They also complement them in other tasks, making that work more valuable and more important.

它們在其他工作任務上會補足人類，讓工作更有價值、更重要。

Sometimes they complement human beings directly, making them more productive or more efficient at a particular task.

有時，它們會直接補足人類，讓人類在特定的工作任務上能更有生產力或更有效率。

So a taxi driver can use a satnav system to navigate on unfamiliar roads.

計程車司機在不熟悉的路上可以用衛星導航系統來協助導航。

An architect can use computer-assisted design software to design bigger, more complicated buildings.

建築師可以用電腦輔助的設計軟體來設計更大、更複雜的建築物。

But technological progress doesn't just complement human beings directly.

但科技進步並不只會直接補足人類。

It also complements them indirectly, and it does this in two ways.

它也會用間接方式補足人類，間接的方式有兩種。

The first is if we think of the economy as a pie, technological progress makes the pie bigger.

第一，如果我們把經濟想成是一塊派，科技進步會讓派變更大。

As productivity increases, incomes rise and demand grows.

隨著生產力增加，收入會增加，需求會成長。

The British pie, for instance, is more than a hundred times the size it was 300 years ago.

比如，英國的派與三百年前相比，現在超過百倍大。

And so people displaced from tasks in the old pie could find tasks to do in the new pie instead.

在舊派工作被取代的人，能在新派中找到工作。

But technological progress doesn't just make the pie bigger.

但科技進步並不只會讓派變大。

It also changes the ingredients in the pie.

它也會改變派的成分原料。

As time passes, people spend their income in different ways, changing how they spread it across existing goods, and developing tastes for entirely new goods, too.

隨時間演進，人會以不同的方式花費他們的收入，改變既有商品花費上的分配，並也會發展出對於全新商品的品味。

New industries are created, new tasks have to be done and that means often new roles have to be filled.

新的產業會被創造出來，有新的工作任務需要被完成，那就意味著有新角色要有人扮演。

So again, the British pie: 300 years ago, most people worked on farms, 150 years ago, in factories, and today, most people work in offices.

所以，再回到英國的派：三百年前，大部分的人在農場工作，一百五十年前，在工廠工作，現今，大部分的人在辦公室工作。

And once again, people displaced from tasks in the old bit of pie could tumble into tasks in the new bit of pie instead.

再提一次，在老派工作被取代的人，可能會在新派當中發現可以做的工作任務。

Economists call these effects complementarities, but really that's just a fancy word to capture the different way that technological progress helps human beings.

經濟學家把這些效應稱為互補性，但那只是個很炫的詞，其實意思就是科技進步用不同的方式在協助人類。

Resolving this Terminator myth shows us that there are two forces at play: one, machine substitution that harms workers, but also these complementarities that do the opposite.

解開這個終結者迷思之後，會發現有兩股力量在運作：第一：機器代替，這會傷害到工人，但也會有第二股力量，互補性，反而會幫助工人。

Now the second myth, what I call the intelligence myth.

再來，第二項迷思，我稱之為「智慧迷思」。

What do the tasks of driving a car, making a medical diagnosis and identifying a bird at a fleeting glimpse have in common?

以下這些工作任務：駕駛一台車、做出醫療診斷，及快速一瞥就辨識出一隻鳥，有何共通性？

Well, these are all tasks that until very recently, leading economists thought couldn't readily be automated.

這些工作任務都是直到最近仍被經濟學家認為不能自動化的工作任務。