I always ask them the same thing:

我總是問他們一樣的事情：

Why do you Google?

你為什麼Google?

Why is Google the search engine of choice for you?

你為什麼選擇Google當作你的搜尋引擎？

Strangely enough, I always get the same three answers.

奇怪的是，我總是得到一樣的三種答案。

One, "Because it works,"

第一種：「因為它有用」

which is a great answer; that's why I Google, too.

很棒的答案，這也是我Google的原因。

Two, somebody will say,

第二種，有人回答：

"I really don't know of any alternatives."

「我實在不知道別的選項。」

It's not an equally great answer and my reply to that is usually,

這不算是一個很棒的答案，我通常都會回應：

"Try to Google the word 'search engine,'

『Google一下「搜尋引擎」啊！

you may find a couple of interesting alternatives."

你或許會找到一些有趣的選項。』

And last but not least, thirdly,

最後，但也很重要的第三種答案，

inevitably, one student will raise her or his hand and say,

不可避免的，總會有位學生舉手並說：

"With Google, I'm certain to always get the best, unbiased search result."

「我相信使用google總是可以得到 最好的且公正的搜尋結果。」

Certain to always get the best, unbiased search result.

相信總是可以得到最好的且公正的搜尋結果

Now, as a man of the humanities,

在此，身為一個人文學科的人，

albeit a digital humanities man,

儘管亦是數位人文學科的人，

that just makes my skin crawl,

這實在令我感到不舒服，

even if I, too, realize that that trust, that idea of the unbiased search result

即使我也了解， 信任它的搜尋結果是公正的這個想法

is a cornerstone in our collective love for and appreciation of Google.

是奠基於我們大家對於google的愛與感激，

I will show you why that, philosophically, is almost an impossibility.

我將跟你們解釋， 從哲學的角度這幾乎是不可能的。

But let me first elaborate, just a little bit, on a basic principle

但先讓我說明一下， 一些關於基本的原則

behind each search query that we sometimes seem to forget.

在搜尋的背後 我們似乎有時會忘記的事。

So whenever you set out to Google something,

每當你要google什麼時，

start by asking yourself this: "Am I looking for an isolated fact?"

先問自己這個問題： 「我是否在找一個獨立的事實？」

What is the capital of France?

法國的首都是什麼？

What are the building blocks of a water molecule?

水分子是由什麼組成的？

Great -- Google away.

很好，就google吧！

There's not a group of scientists who are this close to proving

並不會有一群科學家 有任何一點的想反證說

that it's actually London and H30.

那其實是倫敦和H3O.

You don't see a big conspiracy among those things.

你並不會在這看到什麼大陰謀

We agree, on a global scale,

以全球的規模，我們同意

what the answers are to these isolated facts.

這些獨立事實的答案是什麼。

But if you complicate your question just a little bit and ask something like,

但如果你複雜化你的問題， 一點點就好了，問像這樣的問題

"Why is there an Israeli-Palestine conflict?"

「為何會有以色列巴勒斯坦衝突？」

You're not exactly looking for a singular fact anymore,

你就無法找到單一的事實了，

you're looking for knowledge,

你在搜尋的知識

which is something way more complicated and delicate.

是很複雜且棘手的。

And to get to knowledge,

要得到這個知識，

you have to bring 10 or 20 or 100 facts to the table

你必需將10個20個 或甚至100個事實攤在桌上

and acknowledge them and say, "Yes, these are all true."

認可它們並說： 「是的，這些都是真的。」

But because of who I am,

但因為我是我，

young or old, black or white, gay or straight,

不管是年輕或年老、黑人或白人， 同性戀或異性戀，

I will value them differently.

我將會有不同的解讀，

And I will say, "Yes, this is true,

然後我會說，「是的，這是真的，

but this is more important to me than that."

但這對我來說比那個重要。」

And this is where it becomes interesting,

這便是開始變得有趣的地方，

because this is where we become human.

因為這也是我們為何成為人類的原因，

This is when we start to argue, to form society.

這也是我們開始去爭辯，並形成了社會。

And to really get somewhere, we need to filter all our facts here,

而我們若真的想達到某個程度， 我們必須開始過濾我們的事實，

through friends and neighbors and parents and children

透過我們的朋友、鄰居、父母、小孩

and coworkers and newspapers and magazines,

還有同事、新聞以及雜誌，

to finally be grounded in real knowledge,

最終才能成為有根據的真實知識，

which is something that a search engine is a poor help to achieve.

這也是搜尋引擎較無法達成的。

So, I promised you an example just to show you why it's so hard

所以呢，我答應提供一個範例 來解釋為什麼這麼困難

to get to the point of true, clean, objective knowledge --

去取得真實、不受無染且客觀的知識，

as food for thought.

就讓我們一起思考一下。

I will conduct a couple of simple queries, search queries.

我將進行個簡單的搜尋，

We'll start with "Michelle Obama,"

我們從「米雪兒・歐巴馬」開始，

the First Lady of the United States.

美國的第一夫人，

And we'll click for pictures.

然後我們點選圖片，

It works really well, as you can see.

它運作得很好，就像你看到的一樣，

It's a perfect search result, more or less.

這是個完美的搜尋結果，大體上而言。

It's just her in the picture, not even the President.

只有她在圖片裡，甚至沒有總統。

How does this work?

這是怎麼運作的？

Quite simple.

很簡單，

Google uses a lot of smartness to achieve this, but quite simply,

Google運用很多智慧來達成， 但很簡單地，

they look at two things more than anything.

他們主要會看兩個地方，

First, what does it say in the caption under the picture on each website?

第一，每張圖片在網站上的標題是什麼？

Does it say "Michelle Obama" under the picture?

圖片下方是否標著「米雪兒・歐巴馬」？

Pretty good indication it's actually her on there.

這是很好的指標來告訴我們這是她。

Second, Google looks at the picture file,

第二，Google會看圖片的檔案，

the name of the file as such uploaded to the website.

你上傳圖片到網站上的檔名。

Again, is it called "MichelleObama.jpeg"?

同樣的，是否為「米雪兒歐巴馬.jpeg」？

Pretty good indication it's not Clint Eastwood in the picture.

這是很好的指標來告訴我們 這不是克林·伊斯威特的圖片。

So, you've got those two and you get a search result like this -- almost.

所以，你通過這兩點得到了這樣的搜尋結果， 差不多是這樣的。

Now, in 2009, Michelle Obama was the victim of a racist campaign,

現在來看2009年時，米雪兒・歐巴馬 是一個種族歧視宣傳活動的受害者

where people set out to insult her through her search results.

該活動中人們決定要用搜尋結果來羞辱她，

There was a picture distributed widely over the Internet

當時網路上有一廣為流傳的圖片，

where her face was distorted to look like a monkey.

是她的臉被扭曲成像一隻猴子，

And that picture was published all over.

而那張圖片被到處刊登，

And people published it very, very purposefully,

人們有意圖地刊登這張照片，

to get it up there in the search results.

好讓那張圖片能出現在搜尋結果裡，

They made sure to write "Michelle Obama" in the caption

他們會確保標題是「米雪兒・歐巴馬」

and they made sure to upload the picture as "MichelleObama.jpeg," or the like.

並確保上傳時檔名是「米雪兒歐巴馬.jpeg」， 或類似的。

You get why -- to manipulate the search result.

你知道為什麼，因為要操弄搜尋的結果。

And it worked, too.

而這也真的可行。

So when you picture-Googled for "Michelle Obama" in 2009,

所以在2009年 你google「米雪兒・歐巴馬」的圖片時，

that distorted monkey picture showed up among the first results.

那變形的猴子圖片會出現在搜尋結果的前面。

Now, the results are self-cleansing,

現在，搜尋結果已被自身淨化了

and that's sort of the beauty of it,

這也是它美好的地方

because Google measures relevance every hour, every day.

因為google會測量關聯性， 在每個鐘頭、每一天。

However, Google didn't settle for that this time,

然而，Google這次並不因此滿意，

they just thought, "That's racist and it's a bad search result

他們想說： 「那真是種族歧視，而且這個搜尋結果很差，

and we're going to go back and clean that up manually.

我們將要回去人工清除它，

We are going to write some code and fix it,"

並寫一些編碼來修正。」

which they did.

他們就這麼做了。

And I don't think anyone in this room thinks that was a bad idea.

我想在這個房間內 沒有人覺得那是一個不好的主意，

Me neither.

我也不覺得。

But then, a couple of years go by,

但是後來，幾年過去了，

and the world's most-Googled Anders,

世界上被搜尋最多的次的安德斯，

Anders Behring Breivik,

安德斯·貝林·布雷維克，

did what he did.

做了他做的事，

This is July 22 in 2011,

在2011年7月22號，

and a terrible day in Norwegian history.

挪威歷史上悲痛的一天。

This man, a terrorist, blew up a couple of government buildings

這個人是個恐怖份子，炸毀了幾棟政府大樓

walking distance from where we are right now in Oslo, Norway

就在離我們現在不遠處的挪威奧斯陸，

and then he traveled to the island of Utøya

然後他跑到了烏托亞島，

and shot and killed a group of kids.

射殺了一群孩子，

Almost 80 people died that day.

幾乎八十個人在那天喪生。

And a lot of people would describe this act of terror as two steps,

許多人會描述這個恐怖攻擊有兩步驟

that he did two things: he blew up the buildings and he shot those kids.

便是他做的那兩件事：炸毀大樓和射殺孩子。

It's not true.

這並不是事實，

It was three steps.

其實有三步驟。

He blew up those buildings, he shot those kids,

他炸毀大樓和射殺孩子

and he sat down and waited for the world to Google him.

然後他坐下並等待全世界去google他。

And he prepared all three steps equally well.

這三個步驟他都有準備好

And if there was somebody who immediately understood this,

當時有人馬上就了解這件事，

it was a Swedish web developer,

那就是一位瑞典的網頁開發者，

a search engine optimization expert in Stockholm, named Nikke Lindqvist.

一位斯德哥爾摩的搜尋引擎優化專家， Nikke Lindqvist

He's also a very political guy

他也是一位非常政治性的人

and he was right out there in social media, on his blog and Facebook.

所以他便在他的社群平台，部落格和臉書，

And he told everybody,

告訴大家，

"If there's something that this guy wants right now,

「那個人現在如果有最希望的事，

it's to control the image of himself.

便是控制他自己的形象，

Let's see if we can distort that.

我們來看看是否能扭曲這件事。

Let's see if we, in the civilized world, can protest against what he did

是否我們在這文明的世界 可以抗議他的所作所為，

through insulting him in his search results."

透過他的搜尋結果來污辱他。」

And how?

如何做到？

He told all of his readers the following,

他告訴他的讀者：

"Go out there on the Internet,

「去網路上

find pictures of dog poop on sidewalks --

找狗大便在人行道上的圖片，

find pictures of dog poop on sidewalks --

找狗大便在人行道上的圖片，

publish them in your feeds, on your websites, on your blogs.

把它刊登在你的近況、你的網站或你的部落格。

Make sure to write the terrorist's name in the caption,

並確保將恐怖份子的名字寫在標題上，

make sure to name the picture file "Breivik.jpeg."

確保圖片的檔名為「布雷維克.jpeg」

Let's teach Google that that's the face of the terrorist."

讓我們來教導google那就是恐怖份子的臉。」

And it worked.

這成功了。

Two years after that campaign against Michelle Obama,

在米雪兒・歐巴馬事件後的兩年，

this manipulation campaign against Anders Behring Breivik worked.

這個反對安德斯·貝林·布雷維克的操弄宣傳成功了。

If you picture-Googled for him weeks after the July 22 events from Sweden,

如果在7月22後幾個星期 你在瑞典用google搜尋他的圖片

you'd see that picture of dog poop high up in the search results,

你會看到狗大便的圖片出現在搜尋結果前面，

as a little protest.

以表達抗議。

Strangely enough, Google didn't intervene this time.

奇怪的是，這次google並沒有干涉，

They did not step in and manually clean those search results up.

他們並沒有涉入且人工清除這些搜尋結果。

So the million-dollar question,

一個重要卻難以回答的問題，

is there anything different between these two happenings here?

這兩個事件有什麼不一樣嗎？

Is there anything different between what happened to Michelle Obama

發生在蜜雪兒・歐巴馬的事件有不同於

and what happened to Anders Behring Breivik?

發生在安德斯·貝林·布雷維克的嗎？

Of course not.

當然沒有。

It's the exact same thing,

這是完全一樣的事件。

yet Google intervened in one case and not in the other.

但是google只干涉了其中一件 而沒干涉另一件。

Why?

為什麼？

Because Michelle Obama is an honorable person, that's why,

因為蜜雪兒・歐巴馬是一位高尚的人， 這就是為什麼。

and Anders Behring Breivik is a despicable person.

而安德斯·貝林·布雷維克是一個卑鄙的人。

See what happens there?

看到發生什麼事了嗎？

An evaluation of a person takes place

這裏發生了對一個人的評量

and there's only one power-player in the world

而這世界上只有一有份量的選手

with the authority to say who's who.

有權威能說誰是誰，

"We like you, we dislike you.

「我們喜歡你，我們不喜歡你。

We believe in you, we don't believe in you.

我們相信你，我們不相信你。

You're right, you're wrong. You're true, you're false.

你是對的，你是錯的。 你是真的，你是假的。

You're Obama, and you're Breivik."

你是歐巴馬，而你是布雷維克。」

That's power if I ever saw it.

這是一種力量，如果我能看見的話。

So I'm asking you to remember that behind every algorithm

所以我請你們記得在每個運算法後面，

is always a person,

總有一個人，

a person with a set of personal beliefs

一個有自己信念的人

that no code can ever completely eradicate.

是沒有編碼可以屏除的。

And my message goes out not only to Google,

而我的訊息不單指Google，

but to all believers in the faith of code around the world.

而是給所有世界上所有 信仰編碼的信眾，

You need to identify your own personal bias.

你必需辨識出自己的偏見，

You need to understand that you are human

你必須了解你是人類，

and take responsibility accordingly.

進而負起責任。

And I say this because I believe we've reached a point in time

我會這麼說是因為我相信 我們已經達到了一個時間點

when it's absolutely imperative

非常迫切地

that we tie those bonds together again, tighter:

再次的更密切地連結了

the humanities and the technology.

人性和科技，

Tighter than ever.

比以往更加緊密。

And, if nothing else, to remind us that that wonderfully seductive idea

這僅僅是想提醒我們這美好且誘人的

of the unbiased, clean search result

公正不受污染的搜尋結果

is, and is likely to remain, a myth.

有可能還是個迷思。

Thank you for your time.

謝謝您的時間。

(Applause)

（鼓掌）