在电影《社交网络》的开场场景中，马克·扎克伯格说：“中国拥有高智商人才比全美人口还多”
In the opening dialogue of The Social Network, there’s that line by Mark about more geniuses in China than the total US population…
译文简介
由鲁妮（Rooney）出演的角色表达了不相信，但马克确认了它的真实性。正如许多人之前所说，这是一个很棒的开场场景。马克·扎克伯格：你知道中国拥有天才般智商的人比美国的总人口还多吗？鲁妮·玛拉饰演的艾莉卡·欧布莱特(Erica Albright)：那绝对不可能是真的。
正文翻译
In the opening dialogue of The Social Network, there’s that line by Mark about more geniuses in China than the total US population…
在电影《社交网络》的开场场景中，马克·扎克伯格说：“中国拥有高智商人才比全美人口还多”
评论翻译
很赞 ( 14 )
收藏
And, is this statistic in any way true? Rooney’s character expresses disbelief, but Mark confirms its truth. Great opening scene, as stated by many before.
Mark Zuckerberg : Did you know there are more people with genius IQs living in China than there are people of any kind living in the United States?
Erica Albright : That can't possibly be true.
Mark Zuckerberg : It is.
阿伦·索尔金(Aaron Sorkin) 弄此开场场景的意图是什么？我知道这是在塑造马克·扎克伯格（Mark Zuckerberg）的角色，并且他试图展示马克渴望在哈佛的同龄人中脱颖而出的愿望......
这个统计数据在某种程度上是正确的吗?由鲁妮（Rooney）出演的角色表达了不相信，但马克确认了它的真实性。正如许多人之前所说，这是一个很棒的开场场景。
马克·扎克伯格：你知道中国拥有天才般智商的人比美国的总人口还多吗？
鲁妮·玛拉饰演的艾莉卡·欧布莱特(Erica Albright)：那绝对不可能是真的。
马克·扎克伯格：事实就是如此。
That scene was set circa 2003 when China's population was 1.289 billion and America's was 291 million.
So he's saying that more than 22.6% of people living in China in 2003 have genius IQs.
Given that a genius IQ is normally listed as above 140 and held by ≈0.4% of the population, this is off by several orders of magnitude.
这个场景设定在大约2003年，当时中国的人口是12.89亿，美国是2.91亿。
所以他的意思是，2003年，超过22.6%的中国人拥有天才般的智商。
鉴于天才般智商通常被定义为“智商超过140”，并且大约只有0.4%的人口拥有这一等级智商，这个数字相差了几个数量级。
Yeah this is the type of fact like “using 10% of your brain” that you see floating about on Facebook.
是的，这就是事实：你看Facebook时“只使用了大脑的10%”。
Seems to be foreshadowing.
看起来像是在预示什么。
“You only use 10% of your brain while scrolling facebook” is the actual full quote
原话是“You only use 10% of your brain while scrolling facebook”
It should have said "you can only use 10% of your brain after scrolling Facebook"
应该说“在浏览Facebook之后，你只能使用大脑的10%”。
because the other 90% is now dead brain cells.
因为剩下的90%是死亡的脑细胞。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
That's the joke
这是个笑话
some people can't math, they got 10% of their brain left.
有些人不会数学，他们只剩下10%的大脑（可用）。
To be fair, the walk and talk is a pretty fantastic narrative gimmick, of which he’s generally considered the master
公平地说，边走边说是一种非常奇妙的叙事技巧，他通常被认为是这方面的大师
Yes, China has more geniuses than the US, but so does the continent of Africa (which has ~1.3 BN population and therefore the same number of geniuses calculated in the film).
Access to quality education, available opportunities, existing bodies of work to draw on, and incentives are all critical factors to consider in a "competitive state" scenario .
是的，中国的天才比美国多，但非洲大陆也是如此（其人口约为13亿，因此与电影中计算出的天才数量相同）。
在“竞争状态”场景中，获得优质教育的机会、可利用的机会、现有的工作机构以及激励措施都是需要考虑的关键因素。
Except the average IQ in China is 115 and the average IQ in Africa is 85. The bell curve distribution would give you a way different outcome in that range. It’s like 15% of people having an IQ over 130 in China compared to .2% in the continent of Africa.
除了中国人的平均智商是115外，非洲人的平均智商是85。钟形曲线分布会在这个范围内给出不同的结果。就像中国有15%的人的智商超过130，而非洲大陆只有0.2%的人的智商超过130。
I'm not entirely sure on your source for the average IQ in China but the average IQ in Africa stat is...flawed to say the least. It stems from a handful of studies that were either poorly designed or poorly understood (eg giving IQ tests in English to people who did not primarily speak English).
我不太确定你说的中国平均智商的来源，但是“非洲的平均智商数据”至少可以说是有缺陷的。它源于少数研究，这些研究要么设计得不好，要么理解得不好(例如，用英语对主要不讲英语的人进行智商测试)。
I get the impression that yours is somewhere around 72.
我感觉你的智商在72左右。
This is absolutely not correct. Long term high immigration acts as an IQ shredder. It concentrates high IQ individuals into small geographical locations
这种观点是绝对不正确的。长期的高移民实际上起到了智商筛选的作用，它将高智商的个体集中在较小的地理区域内。
...refers to educated people leaving less desirable areas for somewhere else with more/better opportunity.? Which is quite literally what I commented.
这就是我所说的：人才流失指受过良好教育的人离开不那么理想的地方，到有更多/更好机会的地方去。
You're correct that this is a phenomenon that exists, In the long term, it's pretty bad, especially for foreign countries, if all their smartest workers decide to leave for the US, who is going to stay and improve their countries?
If you have the time, watch this TEDTalk. It's going to explain it better than I ever could.
你说得对，这种现象确实存在，从长远来看，情况非常糟糕，尤其是对外国来说，如果他们所有最聪明的工人都决定去美国，谁会留下来改善他们的国家？
如果你有时间的话，请看TED演讲——将比我解释得更好。
Not inclined to watch a Ted talk, but I'll take your comment as relevant to this conversation.
Totally agree that brain drain is bad for the departed areas.? Fun fact: there are even brain drains within the US nationally (away from southern states).
But as I commented, in a competitive scenario such as between the US and China, fuck yeah we want their best brains working for us to their detriment.That's the competitive part.
我不想看看TED演讲，但我认为你的评论与这次谈话有关。
完全赞同这个说法：人才外流对离开的地区不利。有趣的事实是：甚至在美国全国范围内(远离南部各州)也出现了人才流失现象。
但正如我所评论的，在美国和中国之间的竞争场景中，我们当然希望他们最优秀的头脑为我们工作，从而对他们造成损害，这就是竞争的一部分。
All of that is very true. And with all those built in advantages, the United States will still find a way to fuck things up. I never understood the obsession by many American policy makers with China's success. It should be viewed as a win-win rather than a zero-sum game. And if the US Govt is confident the American version of liberal democracy is the best system, that provides the best opportunities, the most innovation etc, and they have demographics and geography on their side, then why are they even worried about competition from China? Why would they want to ditch belief in the free market in order to try and stymie China's development?
这些都是千真万确的。尽管拥有所有这些固有的优势，美国还是会找到办法把事情搞砸。我一直无法理解为什么许多美国决策者对中国的成功如此痴迷，它应该被视为一场双赢的游戏，而不是零和游戏。如果美国政府相信美国版的自由民主是最好的制度，它提供了最好的机会，最多的创新等，而且他们有人口和地理优势，那么他们为什么还要担心来自中国的竞争？他们为什么要为了阻碍中国的发展而放弃对自由市场的信仰呢？
Pry due in part to chinas corruption, ....
部分原因是C腐败，不保护知识产权，为了推进国家事业不惜TS任何人，包括他们自己的公民。
........, including their own citizens,
Let's not forget the environment.
“不惜TS任何人，包括他们自己的公民。”
我们不要忘记环境。
Tell me how the US is any different.
告诉我美国有什么不同。
They rather downvote you than answer your question. I mean it's no surprise considering nearly half of reddits users are americans
Edit: LM american hivemind
他们宁愿在你的评论下点踩也不愿回复你的评论。我的意思是，考虑到几乎一半的Reddit用户都是美国人，这并不令人惊讶。
Haha you can't apply the same percentage unilaterally for every country/continent, that's not how IQ distribution works
哈哈，你不能单方面地对每个国家/大陆采用相同的百分比，智商分布不是这样的。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
FWIW, according to this the Zuckerberg claim is wrong according to the definition and probabilities of the IQ concept even if one assumes the mean IQ in China is 115. For it to be true, roughly 1 in 4 Chinese would need to have a genius IQ.
值得一提的是，根据智商概念的定义和概率，即使假设中国的平均智商是115，扎克伯格的说法也是错误的。如果这是真的，大约四分之一的中国人拥有天才般的智商。
It also completely ignores that a huge % of china remains very rural lol.
这也完全忽略了中国有很大一部分地区仍然是农村，哈哈。
The problem is, dumb people eat up fake statistics.
问题是，愚蠢的人会接受虚假的统计数据。
Sometimes people use "orders of magnitude" as colloquial exaggeration. In fact I find it's far more frequently used to mean "a lot more" than "in a different decimal place" specifically.
有时人们使用“数量级”作为夸张性语言。事实上，我发现它更多地用来表示“很多”，而不是“在不同的小数点后”。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Mark is a Mark.
The movie was meant to lionize him and pump Facebook value/popularity and came about a year after he literally took Kremlin and Chinese money to fund Facebook
Things get easier to compete against when you get organized crime level money and support. It is a cheat and Mark is forever an errand boy, it isn't his money.
马克就是马克。
这部电影是为了崇拜他，提升Facebook的价值/知名度而制作的，大约一年前，他接受了克里姆林宫和中国的资金来资助Facebook 。
当你得到有组织犯罪级别的资金和支持时，竞争就变得容易了。这是一个骗局，马克永远是一个跑腿的，这不是他的钱。
It's kind of brilliant how they let the Zuck say all this nonsense in the scxt without being checked as they are building his character early on. So on first watch, you hear him spout all these facts in rapid fire and think, "damn, he must be some kind of super genius." Then upon rewatch, you're like, "Wait, what he said is complete bullshit. He was just posturing all along."
他们让扎克在剧本里胡言乱语（内容未经检查），这是一种聪明的做法，因为他们很早就在塑造他的性格。所以最开始就听到他滔滔不绝地说出所有这些事实，然后想，“该死，他一定是某种超级天才。”然后再看一遍，你会想，“等等，他说的全是废话，他一直只是在装腔作势。”
Sounds like someone I know. I just can’t remember who.
听起来像我认识的人，我只是想不起来是谁了。
I doubt it, as Sorkin has a long history of bullshit quotes like that
我对此表示怀疑，因为索尔金对这类屁话有着悠久的历史
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
That first conversation also sets up the multiple timelines. Listen carefully, at one point she asks a question, he says something unrelated, and then answers her question three exchanges later.
第一次对话也设置了多个时间线。仔细听，有一次她问了一个问题，他说了一些无关的东西，然后在三次交流后回答了她的问题。
I think Sorkin is trying to set Zuckerberg up as an opportunistic liar who’ll say and do whatever he wants. The statistic is silly, and, as pointed out by others, incorrect; but it serves the purpose of Zuckerberg’s argument so he uses it. Oddly, it reminds me of Lemon’s ex-boyfriend on 30 Rock constantly bringing up the canard about never being more than a few feet away from a rat in New York. Both characters are manipulative hucksters.
我认为索金（Sorkin）试图将扎克伯格（Zuckerberg）塑造成一个机会主义的骗子，一个愿意说出任何话、做出任何事来达到自己目的的人。这个统计数据很荒谬，正如其他人指出的，它是错误的；但它符合扎克伯格的论点，所以他使用了它。奇怪的是，这让我想起了莱蒙在《我为喜剧狂》里的前男友一直在说他在纽约离老鼠只有几英尺远。这两个角色都是善于操纵性的骗子。
It’s also interesting because I don’t know the prence of geniuses in the general population, so I do t know if he’s lying or not. It seems outlandish, but he’s also pretty adamant it’s correct. Sorkin is making you decide in the first scene if you trust him or if he’s full of shit.
这也很有趣，因为我不知道天才在普通人群中有多普遍，所以我不知道他是否在撒谎。这看起来很奇怪，但他也很坚定地认为这是正确的。索尔金让你在第一幕就决定你是否相信他，或者是否相信他的满嘴屁话。
This is wrong and there is no evidence anywhere else in the movie that Zuckerberg lies.
The movie portrays Mark Zuckerberg the same way as the book ("The Accidental Billionaires"), a highly-intelligent nerd who has a problem with authority and really wants to do something significant with his life.
Every instance you could call being "an opportunistic liar" is more plausibly explained as being an outcast with a chip on his shoulder. Why was he so unimpressed by Winklevoss Twins but willing to work with Saverin? Because Saverin was an outcast and the Wiklevoss were not. Why was Mark so entranced by Sean Parker? Because Parker was an outcast and enabled Mark to tell everyone who doubted him to fuck off. Why is Mark so combative with lawyers? Because they're authority figures who he feels above.
I think the movie's portrayal of Zuckerberg is fairly neutral. You can't deny his ability and passion is why the website exists, but the way he pursued his goal was cavalier and needlessly combative. I think the movie ends in a way that acknowledges Mark feels regret about his decision. After Saverin is cutout he snaps at Sean for how it was handled and in the party scene/phone call scene it appears Mark is distancing himself from Sean (and it is referenced in the court scenes Sean is no longer at the company). The final scene of the movie is Mark reaching out to his ex-girlfriend — the first person he burned in his journey. Why would he do that? I think it's because he feels bad.
People want to hate Mark Zuckerberg in real life. They use their hatred as confirmation bias when watching the movie, but none of that is in the movie itself.
As for OP's question: You've got it right. Mark is fixated on a statistic because he wants to do something significant in life and stats like that make him terrified at how hard it is to do that.
Why is the stat wrong? Because Aaron Sorkin makes shit up all the time. This isn't unique to Zuckerberg's character or The Social Network. His entire career is full of nonsense "facts." People are reading too much into this.
这是错误的，电影中没有任何证据表明扎克伯格在撒谎。
电影中马克·扎克伯格的形象和书里（《意外的亿万富翁》）的形象一样：高度聪明的书呆子，他对权威有抵触情绪，真的想在他的生命中做一些有意义的事情。
每一个你可以称之为“机会主义骗子”的例子，都被更合理地解释为是一个带着不满情绪的被排斥者。为什么他对文克莱沃斯兄弟(Winklevoss twins)这么不感兴趣却愿意和萨维林（ Saverin）合作?因为萨维林是一个被排斥者，而文克莱沃斯兄弟不是。为什么马克对肖恩·帕克（Sean Parker）如此着迷？因为帕克是一个被排斥者，并且让马克能够对所有怀疑他的人不屑一顾。为什么马克如此喜欢与律师争论？因为他们是权威人物，而他却觉得自己是高人一等的。
我认为这部电影对扎克伯格的刻画是相当中立的。你不能否认他的能力和激情是这个网站存在的原因，但他追求目标的方式是傲慢和不必要的好斗。在萨维林被剔除后，他对肖恩的处理方式进行了抨击，在派对场景/电话场景中，马克似乎正在疏远肖恩(在法庭场景中，肖恩已经不在公司了)。电影的最后一幕是马克向他的前女友伸出手——她是他在这段旅程中第一个被他抛弃的人。他为什么要这么做?我想这是因为他感觉不好。
在现实生活中，人们想要讨厌马克·扎克伯格。他们用他们的仇恨作为看电影时的确认偏误，但电影本身并没有这些东西。
至于楼主的提问：你说对了。马克对统计数据着迷，因为他想在生命中做出一些有意义的事情，而这样的数据让他感到害怕，因为要做到这一点是多么的困难。
为什么这个数据是错误的?因为亚伦·索尔金总是胡编乱造。这并不是扎克伯格的性格或《社交网络》独有的。他的整个职业生涯充满了无稽之谈的“事实”。人们对此解读得太多了。
The character of Mark isn't "willing" to work with Eduardo. He needs him. Eduardo is a tool. He feels superior to Eduardo Mark's primary drive is status. Eduardo and the Winklevoss twins are driven by financial success. They're handed the things Mark feels entitled to which is why Mark doesn't respect them. Eduardo recognizes Sean Parker as a failure but he's revered by Mark because of his perceived status as an icon or, more importantly, "cool".
马克的性格并不“愿意”与爱德华多（Eduardo）合作。他需要他，爱德华多是个工具，他觉得自己比爱德华多高人一等。马克的主要驱动力是地位。爱德华多和文克莱沃斯兄弟(Winklevoss twins)追求的是财务成功。他们拿了马克认为自己有权拥有的东西，这就是为什么马克不尊重他们的原因。爱德华多认出肖恩·帕克是一个失败者，但马克因为他因为被马克视为一个标志性的偶像或更重要的是“酷”的象征而尊敬他。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
That stat about Chinese geniuses is so obviously wrong that it's more likely a deliberate choice by the writer than a mistake. It's one thing for a writer to make stuff up that the average person can't know without googling, but it's another to make stuff up that is obviously false and to even have a character challenge that made up stuff.
关于中国天才的统计显然是错误的，这更像是作者深思熟虑的选择，而不是一个错误。对于一个作家来说，不去谷歌就能编出一般人都不知道的东西是一回事，但编出明显是假的东西甚至是一个虚构的角色挑战是另一回事。
This is an interesting take but it's hard to believe that Sorkin is so stupid that he thought this clearly ridiculous factoid could be true.
这是一个有趣的观点，但很难相信索尔金是如此愚蠢，以至于他认为这个明显荒谬的事实可能是真的。
The first 10 mins set ups the entire character frxwork for Zuck and answers what is it that drives Zuckerberg who is an awkward asshole who is overly confident in himself to a flaw where he can't be wrong -- to bringing the biggest social network that steals people's data and sells it. The reason is he's insecure and an asshole.
前10分钟为扎克伯格建立了整个性格框架，并回答了是什么驱使扎克伯格这个笨拙的混蛋，对自己过于自信，以至于他不可能出错——带来了最大的社交网络，窃取人们的数据并出售它。原因是他缺乏安全感，是个混蛋。
Honestly that myth predated Facebook. I’ve been hearing that since I was a kid.
老实说，这个荒缪的说法在Facebook出现之前就存在了。我从小就听人这么说。
If you’re only using 10% of your brain how do you know you’re only using 10% of your brain…
如果你只使用了大脑的10%，你怎么知道你只使用了大脑的10%。
i think it’s a little bit more than that.
He envisions geniuses in China to be much like himself: extremely qualified for success, and yet doomed to poverty and mediocrity by larger sociopolitical forces outside their control.? His numbers are wrong, yes, but his attitude throughout the movie, from his jealousy towards the born-to-privilege Winklevoss twins to his excitement at being a mover and shaker like Sean Parker, derives from this as he’s not so much critical of class heirarchy as he does believe his specialness entitles him to a place atop it.
我认为这不仅仅是那样。
他设想中国的天才们与他自己非常相似：极其有资格成功，然而，由于不受他们控制的更大的社会政治力量的存在，他们注定要陷入贫困和平庸。是的，他的数字是错误的，但他在整个电影中的态度（从他对生来就享有特权的文克莱沃斯兄弟(Winklevoss twins)的嫉妒，到他对成为一个像肖恩·帕克那样的有影响力的人物的兴奋，都源于此，他并不是对阶级等级制度持批判态度，因为他相信他的特殊性使他有资格在阶级等级制度的顶端占有一席之地。