NASA's Pathfinder spacecraft landed on the surface of Mars,

美國宇航局的 "探路者 "號飛船降落在火星表面。

and began transmitting incredible, iconic images back to Earth.

並開始將不可思議的標誌性影像傳回地球。

But several days in, something went terribly wrong.

但幾天下來，出了大問題。

The transmissions stopped.

傳送停止了。

Pathfinder was, in effect, procrastinating:

探路者實際上是在拖延時間。

keeping itself fully occupied but failing to do its most important work.

讓自己忙得不可開交，但卻沒有做最重要的工作。

What was going on?

到底發生了什麼事？

There was a bug, it turned out, in its scheduler.

原來，它的調度器出現了一個BUG。

Every operating system has something called the scheduler

每個作業系統都有一個叫調度器的東西

that tells the CPU how long to work on each task before switching,

告訴CPU在切換之前，每個任務要工作多長時間。

and what to switch to.

以及換成什麼。

Done right, computers move so fluidly between their various responsibilities,

如果做得好，計算機在各種職責之間的移動是如此流暢。

they give the illusion of doing everything simultaneously.

他們給人一種同時做所有事情的錯覺。

But we all know what happens when things go wrong.

但我們都知道出了問題會發生什麼。

This should give us, if nothing else, some measure of consolation.

如果沒有其他原因，這應該給我們一些安慰。

Even computers get overwhelmed sometimes.

即使是電腦有時也會不堪重負。

Maybe learning about the computer science of scheduling

也許學習計算機科學的調度

can give us some ideas about our own human struggles with time.

可以給我們提供一些關於自己人類與時間鬥爭的想法。

One of the first insights is that all the time you spend prioritizing your work

第一個見解之一是，你花在工作優先級上的所有時間

is time you aren't spending doing it.

是你沒有花時間去做。

For instance, let's say when you check your inbox, you scan all the messages,

比如說，當你檢查收件箱時，你會掃描所有的資訊。

choosing which is the most important.

選擇哪個是最重要的。

Once you've dealt with that one, you repeat.

一旦你處理了那個問題，你就重複。

Seems sensible, but there's a problem here.

看起來很合理，但這裡有一個問題。

This is what's known as a quadratic-time algorithm.

這就是所謂的二次元時間算法。

With an inbox that's twice as full, these passes will take twice as long

在收件箱滿了一倍的情況下，這些通行證需要的時間會多一倍

and you'll need to do twice as many of them!

而你需要做兩倍的數量!

This means four times the work.

這意味著四倍的工作量。

The programmers of the operating system Linux

作業系統Linux的程序員

encountered a similar problem in 2003.

在2003年遇到了類似的問題。

Linux would rank every single one of its tasks in order of importance,

Linux會將每一項任務按重要性排序。

and sometimes spent more time ranking tasks than doing them.

而且有時花在排任務上的時間比做任務的時間還多。

The programmers' counterintuitive solution was to replace this full ranking

程序員們反常的解決方案是將這個完整的排名替換為

with a limited number of priority “buckets.”

與有限的優先 "桶"。

The system was less precise about what to do next

該系統對下一步的工作不太準確。

but more than made up for it by spending more time making progress.

但更多的是通過花更多的時間取得進步來彌補。

So with your emails, insisting on always doing the very most important thing first

所以，對於你的郵件，堅持永遠先做最重要的事情。

could lead to a meltdown.

可能導致崩潰。

Waking up to an inbox three times fuller than normal

一覺醒來，收件箱比平時多了三倍。

could take nine times longer to clear.

可能需要9倍的時間來清理。

You'd be better off replying in chronological order, or even at random!

你最好按時間順序回覆，甚至隨機回覆!

Surprisingly, sometimes giving up on doing things in the perfect order

竟然有時候放棄了做事情的完美順序。

may be the key to getting them done.

可能是完成它們的關鍵。

Another insight that emerges from computer scheduling

從計算機調度中得到的另一個啟示是

has to do with one of the most prevalent features of modern life: interruptions.

與現代生活中最普遍的特徵之一有關：中斷。

When a computer goes from one task to another,

當計算機從一個任務轉到另一個任務時。

it has to do what's called a context switch,

它要做的就是所謂的上下文切換。

bookmarking its place in one task,

在一個任務中書籤其位置。

moving old data out of its memory and new data in.

將舊數據從其內存中移出，新數據移入。

Each of these actions comes at a cost.

這些行動都是有代價的。

The insight here is that there's a fundamental tradeoff

這裡的見解是，有一個基本的權衡。

between productivity and responsiveness.

生產力和反應能力之間。

Getting serious work done means minimizing context switches.

完成嚴肅的工作意味著儘量減少上下文切換。

But being responsive means reacting anytime something comes up.

但是，反應迅速意味著隨時做出反應。

These two principles are fundamentally in tension.

這兩個原則在根本上是相互矛盾的。

Recognizing this tension allows us

認識到這種緊張關係，我們可以

to decide where we want to strike that balance.

來決定我們要在哪裡取得這種平衡。

The obvious solution is to minimize interruptions.

顯而易見的解決方案是儘量減少中斷。

The less obvious one is to group them.

不太明顯的就是分組。

If no notification or email requires a response

如果沒有通知或電子郵件要求回覆

more urgently than once an hour, say,

比每小時一次更緊急，說。

then that's exactly how often you should check them. No more.

那麼這正是你應該檢查它們的頻率。不再是了。

In computer science, this idea goes by the name of interrupt coalescing.

在計算機科學中，這種想法被稱為中斷凝聚。

Rather than dealing with things as they come up –

而不是在事情出現的時候就去處理------。

Oh, the mouse was moved?

哦，滑鼠被動了？

A key was pressed?

一個鍵被按下了？

More of that file downloaded? –

更多的那個文件下載？–

the system groups these interruptions together

系統將這些中斷分組

based on how long they can afford to wait.

根據他們能承受的等待時間。

In 2013, interrupt coalescing

2013年，中斷凝聚

triggered a massive improvement in laptop battery life.

引發了筆記本電池壽命的大幅提升。

This is because deferring interruptions lets a system check everything at once,

這是因為延後中斷可以讓系統一次檢查所有的東西。

then quickly re-enter a low-power state.

然後迅速重新進入低功率狀態。

As with computers, so it is with us.

就像電腦一樣，我們也是如此。

Perhaps adopting a similar approach

也許採用類似的方法

might allow us users to reclaim our own attention,

可能會讓我們用戶重新獲得自己的關注。

and give us back one of the things that feels so rare in modern life: rest.

並把現代生活中感覺難得的東西之一還給我們：休息。